Hey can someone correct me if I'm wrong but, aren't these companies just shuffling the same billions around and just claiming they keep earning more? Like if Anthropic invests 10b in chips from...
Hey can someone correct me if I'm wrong but, aren't these companies just shuffling the same billions around and just claiming they keep earning more? Like if Anthropic invests 10b in chips from Nvidia, nvidia claims a 10b input that they invest in Anthropic, anthropic claims 10b input then invests in more nvidia chips that now claims 20b input invests 10b in anthropic and anthropic claims 20b in input. Is this not what's happening? And if it is what's happening...how is this legal?
Sort of. NVIDIA is investing in anthropic, yes, but that's cash raised, not revenue, and it doesn't get reported as revenue (or earnings) until someone buys something. When you say "input" you're...
Sort of. NVIDIA is investing in anthropic, yes, but that's cash raised, not revenue, and it doesn't get reported as revenue (or earnings) until someone buys something. When you say "input" you're conflating those two things (investment and revenue) but they're very different.
It would be illegal if it was either a fake deal (no actual chips being sold) or not disclosed, but it's both real and heavily discussed. Why should it be illegal if everyone is open about it? It might not be a good idea for the health of the two companies - time will tell - but that's very different than "should be illegal."
It's not unreasonable for certain practices to be made illegal if they cause huge bubbles that destabilise the entire economy. Many such policies tend to come in after large crashes. My...
It's not unreasonable for certain practices to be made illegal if they cause huge bubbles that destabilise the entire economy. Many such policies tend to come in after large crashes.
My understanding is that circular financing of this kind was borderline illegal after a previous crash (I think dot-com?), but the recent years of deregulation saw to that.
Properly disclosed circular financing has never been in jeopardy as far as I am aware. Fraudulent swaps have been prosecuted many times after crashes though, yes.
My understanding is that circular financing of this kind was borderline illegal after a previous crash (I think dot-com?)
Properly disclosed circular financing has never been in jeopardy as far as I am aware. Fraudulent swaps have been prosecuted many times after crashes though, yes.
I think my question is because it seems like a dubious way to claim high value. Thanks for the correction though I did have a nieve view of their finances. I just think it shouldn't necessarily be...
I think my question is because it seems like a dubious way to claim high value. Thanks for the correction though I did have a nieve view of their finances. I just think it shouldn't necessarily be legal because Anthropic is trying to go public with a huge valuation but to me the finances seem dubious.
Yeah, it is a weird situation. On the one hand, yes, company X putting 10B into company Y does inflate the valuation of company Y - but not artificially, if that makes sense. Company X did...
Yeah, it is a weird situation. On the one hand, yes, company X putting 10B into company Y does inflate the valuation of company Y - but not artificially, if that makes sense. Company X did actually put 10B in. If anything the deal should make you more skeptical of Nvidia, not anthropic, because for anthropic it's pure upside. Nvidia is the one subsidizing their own revenues.
Yeah that's true about scrutinizing Nvidia more I guess honestly it just feels like all these companys involved with AI are juggling plates between each other and I'm worried that us tax payers...
Yeah that's true about scrutinizing Nvidia more I guess honestly it just feels like all these companys involved with AI are juggling plates between each other and I'm worried that us tax payers will be the ones to foot the bill for broken plates if you can follow my metaphor. But I'm also a bit cynical and a bit of a doomer that can't see a positive outcome for a lot of this so that's probably my main problem.
Edit: that's us as in we not us as in United States
Oh I just assume there will be "Too Big to Fail" style government bailouts plus how much the American oligarchs control elected politicians through superPACs I don't see why our government...
Oh I just assume there will be "Too Big to Fail" style government bailouts plus how much the American oligarchs control elected politicians through superPACs I don't see why our government wouldn't bail these companies out if they go belly up. I guess it is all a big IF. BUT any government bailout is done with tax payer dollars, those are the only dollars our federal government has at its disposal from my understanding.
Yeah, government bailouts are done with tax dollars. Not directly or exactly, of course, but it's true enough for this conversation. (It's arcane financial machinery but at the end of the day the...
Yeah, government bailouts are done with tax dollars. Not directly or exactly, of course, but it's true enough for this conversation. (It's arcane financial machinery but at the end of the day the government is financially implicated in whatever bailout and taxes fund the government).
Regarding a bailout: Nobody knows for sure what will happen, I suppose, but "too big to fail" for the financial sector in 2008 was something of a unique situation. It wasn't just because the companies were really big, it was because of fears that the entire financial system would collapse as banks went under. Auto companies were bailed out as well a few years later, but that was under a different logic (millions of jobs in the Midwest).
The math gets weirder for e.g. a bailout of Anthropic. If Anthropic fails that would imply the fundamental bet - that AI is a profitable technology - was wrong. So what would a government bailout even do, you know? At that point it's more like the Manhattan project, where the government has taken over the entire thing for strategic geopolitical reasons.
People do make exactly that proposal, so like I said I could see it happening. But it's complicated!
I think, sadly, that it’s also important to consider “the relevant people were bribed / cajoled / threatened / blackmailed by those who stand to lose / gain” as a potential reason for a bailout,...
I think, sadly, that it’s also important to consider “the relevant people were bribed / cajoled / threatened / blackmailed by those who stand to lose / gain” as a potential reason for a bailout, if one were to happen.
In the past I’d say that as a slightly glib and pessimistic statement on who does or doesn’t get the kid gloves treatment when the shit hits the fan and some level of bailout is probably warranted. In current year I’m saying quite literally: it is plausible that the US government would allocate several billion dollars with entirely spurious reasoning purely to repay a favour to an individual or small group.
Overall, the company’s financial position is surprisingly good. Revenue soared between 2025 and early 2026, allowing the company to report its first-ever operating profit in the second quarter. At the end of June, Anthropic had more cash reserves than all but two non-bank companies: Google and Berkshire Hathaway.
However, the next couple of years could be challenging for the AI giant. Anticipating continued growth, Anthropic has committed to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on compute from Amazon, Google, SpaceXAI, Broadcom, and other companies. To recoup that spending, Anthropic needs its annual revenue to grow to hundreds of billions of dollars as well.
Still reviewing, but given that they left out the lines about all those contractual obligations we mostly already have a cursory understanding of and the Q3 earnings they allegedly already told...
Still reviewing, but given that they left out the lines about all those contractual obligations we mostly already have a cursory understanding of and the Q3 earnings they allegedly already told investors about still makes me think this is a lipstick on a pig situation.
As well as its warnings about not expecting its revenue to keep growing as it did in 2026. All that put together makes that title very optimistic.
I mean, their financials can still be surprisingly good and utterly doomed at the same time. The two ideas aren't objective nor mutually exclusive. I can't get over how poorly everyone seems to...
I mean, their financials can still be surprisingly good and utterly doomed at the same time. The two ideas aren't objective nor mutually exclusive.
I can't get over how poorly everyone seems to have internalized the lessons from the Dotcom Bubble. Often it seems like people just drop a "pets.com, amirite?" and completely misinterpret what that whole thing was about. It was throwing billions into infrastructure build-out on entirely speculative projections for near-term demand that popped that party balloon, and here we are not even 25 years later blowing up an even bigger, more speculative balloon all over again.
The thing you don't understand about Artificial Intelligence is that AI is fundamentally unlike anything that has come before. Artificial Intelligence isn't just artificial—it's intelligent. The...
The thing you don't understand about Artificial Intelligence is that AI is fundamentally unlike anything that has come before. Artificial Intelligence isn't just artificial—it's intelligent. The wave of the future will be AI because AI is Artificial Intelligence. Like, think about computers. Really think about them for a moment. That's what AI is, but better. AI is computers...but better because the computers are intelligent. And they can do all the things computers can do—intelligently—and all the things you can do—artificially.
As an AI expert, people often ask me "sir, why is AI so good?" And you know what I tell them? I tell them "if you only knew what AI could do and why it is so good, you wouldn't even be asking that question. It's that good." That's how good it is. It's so powerful that the world will be fundamentally changed by it. On the surface level, if not at the molecular level.
The whole world, no, everything, will be changed by AI because of the artificial intelligence inside the AI. It's a revolution in computers and—yes—even all of planet Earth. Even the whole world. The artificial intelligence. It's incredible.
If you look at the treasuries, they're—money not backed by gold? What kind of—that's a NON-system. Whose idea was it to put Fiat in charge of the treasuries? They're so small! I've been in one. No...
If you look at the treasuries, they're—money not backed by gold? What kind of—that's a NON-system. Whose idea was it to put Fiat in charge of the treasuries? They're so small! I've been in one. No room for a passenger in the back seat. We should put Dodge in charge of the money. They make big trucks. I mean, have you seen them? They're big, wonderful trucks. They should be our treasuries, and THAT'S why AI is so big for the money.
Hey can someone correct me if I'm wrong but, aren't these companies just shuffling the same billions around and just claiming they keep earning more? Like if Anthropic invests 10b in chips from Nvidia, nvidia claims a 10b input that they invest in Anthropic, anthropic claims 10b input then invests in more nvidia chips that now claims 20b input invests 10b in anthropic and anthropic claims 20b in input. Is this not what's happening? And if it is what's happening...how is this legal?
Sort of. NVIDIA is investing in anthropic, yes, but that's cash raised, not revenue, and it doesn't get reported as revenue (or earnings) until someone buys something. When you say "input" you're conflating those two things (investment and revenue) but they're very different.
It would be illegal if it was either a fake deal (no actual chips being sold) or not disclosed, but it's both real and heavily discussed. Why should it be illegal if everyone is open about it? It might not be a good idea for the health of the two companies - time will tell - but that's very different than "should be illegal."
It's not unreasonable for certain practices to be made illegal if they cause huge bubbles that destabilise the entire economy. Many such policies tend to come in after large crashes.
My understanding is that circular financing of this kind was borderline illegal after a previous crash (I think dot-com?), but the recent years of deregulation saw to that.
Properly disclosed circular financing has never been in jeopardy as far as I am aware. Fraudulent swaps have been prosecuted many times after crashes though, yes.
I think my question is because it seems like a dubious way to claim high value. Thanks for the correction though I did have a nieve view of their finances. I just think it shouldn't necessarily be legal because Anthropic is trying to go public with a huge valuation but to me the finances seem dubious.
Yeah, it is a weird situation. On the one hand, yes, company X putting 10B into company Y does inflate the valuation of company Y - but not artificially, if that makes sense. Company X did actually put 10B in. If anything the deal should make you more skeptical of Nvidia, not anthropic, because for anthropic it's pure upside. Nvidia is the one subsidizing their own revenues.
Yeah that's true about scrutinizing Nvidia more I guess honestly it just feels like all these companys involved with AI are juggling plates between each other and I'm worried that us tax payers will be the ones to foot the bill for broken plates if you can follow my metaphor. But I'm also a bit cynical and a bit of a doomer that can't see a positive outcome for a lot of this so that's probably my main problem.
Edit: that's us as in we not us as in United States
What makes you think taxpayers will be left to foot the bill? I can sort of see why that might happen but don't want to put words in your mouth.
Oh I just assume there will be "Too Big to Fail" style government bailouts plus how much the American oligarchs control elected politicians through superPACs I don't see why our government wouldn't bail these companies out if they go belly up. I guess it is all a big IF. BUT any government bailout is done with tax payer dollars, those are the only dollars our federal government has at its disposal from my understanding.
Yeah, government bailouts are done with tax dollars. Not directly or exactly, of course, but it's true enough for this conversation. (It's arcane financial machinery but at the end of the day the government is financially implicated in whatever bailout and taxes fund the government).
Regarding a bailout: Nobody knows for sure what will happen, I suppose, but "too big to fail" for the financial sector in 2008 was something of a unique situation. It wasn't just because the companies were really big, it was because of fears that the entire financial system would collapse as banks went under. Auto companies were bailed out as well a few years later, but that was under a different logic (millions of jobs in the Midwest).
The math gets weirder for e.g. a bailout of Anthropic. If Anthropic fails that would imply the fundamental bet - that AI is a profitable technology - was wrong. So what would a government bailout even do, you know? At that point it's more like the Manhattan project, where the government has taken over the entire thing for strategic geopolitical reasons.
People do make exactly that proposal, so like I said I could see it happening. But it's complicated!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_the_2008%E2%80%932010_automotive_industry_crisis_on_the_United_States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Economic_Stabilization_Act_of_2008
You're right there is more nuance than at first glance! Thanks for the replies! I hope you have a great rest of your day!
You too mate!
I think, sadly, that it’s also important to consider “the relevant people were bribed / cajoled / threatened / blackmailed by those who stand to lose / gain” as a potential reason for a bailout, if one were to happen.
In the past I’d say that as a slightly glib and pessimistic statement on who does or doesn’t get the kid gloves treatment when the shit hits the fan and some level of bailout is probably warranted. In current year I’m saying quite literally: it is plausible that the US government would allocate several billion dollars with entirely spurious reasoning purely to repay a favour to an individual or small group.
@vord :)
Still reviewing, but given that they left out the lines about all those contractual obligations we mostly already have a cursory understanding of and the Q3 earnings they allegedly already told investors about still makes me think this is a lipstick on a pig situation.
As well as its warnings about not expecting its revenue to keep growing as it did in 2026. All that put together makes that title very optimistic.
I mean, their financials can still be surprisingly good and utterly doomed at the same time. The two ideas aren't objective nor mutually exclusive.
I can't get over how poorly everyone seems to have internalized the lessons from the Dotcom Bubble. Often it seems like people just drop a "pets.com, amirite?" and completely misinterpret what that whole thing was about. It was throwing billions into infrastructure build-out on entirely speculative projections for near-term demand that popped that party balloon, and here we are not even 25 years later blowing up an even bigger, more speculative balloon all over again.
Yea except GPUs depreciate a heck of a lot faster than dark fiber.
The thing you don't understand about Artificial Intelligence is that AI is fundamentally unlike anything that has come before. Artificial Intelligence isn't just artificial—it's intelligent. The wave of the future will be AI because AI is Artificial Intelligence. Like, think about computers. Really think about them for a moment. That's what AI is, but better. AI is computers...but better because the computers are intelligent. And they can do all the things computers can do—intelligently—and all the things you can do—artificially.
As an AI expert, people often ask me "sir, why is AI so good?" And you know what I tell them? I tell them "if you only knew what AI could do and why it is so good, you wouldn't even be asking that question. It's that good." That's how good it is. It's so powerful that the world will be fundamentally changed by it. On the surface level, if not at the molecular level.
The whole world, no, everything, will be changed by AI because of the artificial intelligence inside the AI. It's a revolution in computers and—yes—even all of planet Earth. Even the whole world. The artificial intelligence. It's incredible.
And that's why Anthropic. Thank you. AI.
That's a great point. From now on I'll appreciate AI, not just for its intelligence but for its artificiality.
It's not just artificial intelligence—it's a revolution and you identified it early. That's something to be proud of.
I can't even tell what's sarcasm anymore. That's how far this shit has gone.
The Onions have always been magicially delicious.
You were right to push back on that, it turns out the Treasuries are the smoking gun.
If you look at the treasuries, they're—money not backed by gold? What kind of—that's a NON-system. Whose idea was it to put Fiat in charge of the treasuries? They're so small! I've been in one. No room for a passenger in the back seat. We should put Dodge in charge of the money. They make big trucks. I mean, have you seen them? They're big, wonderful trucks. They should be our treasuries, and THAT'S why AI is so big for the money.
I was genuinely angry reading through most of this... 😅👏
And you, like me, read all the way to the end. Stupid stinking humans.
I just pull out my soundboard and tap “A” … wait a few seconds … and then “I” in the manner of the Lois Griffin “9” … “11” meme.
Well yeah, it’s not even Artificial Intelligence anymore, it’s Super Intelligence /sarcasm