Now a company formerly known as Innovative Beverage Group is doing Long Island Iced Tea for Quantum Computing.
“
So I share the skepticism on Ai at its current frothy levels. But not on quantum computing, which I've been reading about for decades now. A bit more frothing, and then maybe.
But actually my view of the two are very similar. The hardware matters. The software, eh, it matters, but not so much from an investment perspective.
GPUs are hugely important, they do very cool things, and CUDA is technically software but it's really part of a hardware package. Without it GPUs likely wouldn't be as important.
So when an AI company says “our software will use AI to provide recipes for consumers! eAItre we'll call it! Sure the first recipe was for ‘Pizza a la Glue,’ but we'll get it fixed before our 2-inch runway runs out. It'll be revolutionary!” Run. (Viable software companies that AI-wash otherwise useful, and actually not very AI, features are a different thing.)
Maybe AI will get to that point, but why assume this one company will have the magic (pizza) sauce? Or, if it does, that a bigger company won't copy it and tack it onto the SaaS subscription bundle you already have? Or some open source solution will make it irrelevant? Crypto is software that can be anything. And anything a small token creates, a big token can incorporate in a soft or hard fork. Thus market cap is usually king.
Ditto, I'm not too excited about Arqit for just that reason. Just software, no hardware. But Ionq, D-wave, and Rigetti (and a number of big players, Google, IBM, etc) are doing hardware, mixed with software, but not just hardware. And so is/was a company called QPhoton.
That second article mostly aged well, with one exception: RIOT. The difference between Long Blockchain and Riot Blockchain (later Riot Platforms)? Long never actually bought any bitcoin mining machines (hardware) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Blockchain_Corp . Riot did.
What about the origin story? Does it matter that Berkshire Hathaway was a textile manufacturer? No, that was just the direction Buffett first went and the name stuck from then on. I'm not saying QUBT is run by a Buffett-level genius. Just not someone Long-Blockchain-level dumb. Dumb enough to change the name only and basically nothing else.
If I had to guess a long term winner it would likely be Ionq, and stock reflects that. Or Google if the AI, search-engine ensh**tification, and overdue-monopoly busting doesn't destroy it before Willow has a chance to redeem it. But I wouldn't try to guess specific winners because before the dot-com bust I'd probably have guessed Cisco based on the aforementioned. Cisco wasn't a complete loser though is my point. That and QUBT does not seem to be another Long Blockchain.
“
(This is why money is a bad gift - it can be easily returned.)
“
Well, you mentioned Native Americans… What about Asians? They might beg to differ. Note, a lot of it is one-directional. To kids. To newlyweds. Adult to adult outside of events that are not predictably and annually affecting both (holidays and birthdays) is rare. And indeed would negate each other. Newlyweds need money for a house, not air fryers! Every physical gift to a kid is a white elephant the parent will need to put into the toy box at night. Honestly, American consumerism is out of control. If we gave time, homemade gifts, etc. That would be different. But I'm not sold that I need to buy.
Horn of one's own moment for tooting. How prescient was this?
"
Maybe AI will get to that point, but why assume this one company will have the magic (pizza) sauce? Or, if it does, that a bigger company won't copy it and tack it onto the SaaS subscription bundle you already have? Or some open source solution will make it irrelevant?
"
DeepSeek anyone? Third sentence seems pretty on point right now. And who knows, maybe Microsoft/Google takes DeepSeek and improves CoPilot/Gemini, making second point.
I think the deepseek news is being read wrong by the majority of people. It doesn't mean AI /completely/ moves air in or out rapidly. I.e. Sucks or blows. Though I have no idea why this is pejorative. I'm actually quite fond of wind. I'd even say the sensation of recoveiving it, consentually of course, is quite pleasant. Perhaps it is a pejorative against the people who do it, namely those that fan others. That is so non-sensical, I bet anyone who would denegrate such people actually secretly desires and/or partakes in the act.
Regardless, the case for AI is the same, which is perhaps bullish even when looked at clear-eyed perspective that small percentages of productivity improvements are still huge. it means that betting on software can move air rapidly and pejoratively. As any one can do anything, e.g. open source. Hardware like NVDA, or hardware-with-proprietary-software packages like NVDA with CUDA, still win.
I'm so stoked about DeepSeek. A *side project*. Treated as the novelty/incremental step that LLMs largely are - not useless! But in need of scoping. Undercuts the OpenAI cult, probably pushes capital into other realms, it's a win/win/win.
“
Now a company formerly known as Innovative Beverage Group is doing Long Island Iced Tea for Quantum Computing.
“
So I share the skepticism on Ai at its current frothy levels. But not on quantum computing, which I've been reading about for decades now. A bit more frothing, and then maybe.
But actually my view of the two are very similar. The hardware matters. The software, eh, it matters, but not so much from an investment perspective.
GPUs are hugely important, they do very cool things, and CUDA is technically software but it's really part of a hardware package. Without it GPUs likely wouldn't be as important.
So when an AI company says “our software will use AI to provide recipes for consumers! eAItre we'll call it! Sure the first recipe was for ‘Pizza a la Glue,’ but we'll get it fixed before our 2-inch runway runs out. It'll be revolutionary!” Run. (Viable software companies that AI-wash otherwise useful, and actually not very AI, features are a different thing.)
Maybe AI will get to that point, but why assume this one company will have the magic (pizza) sauce? Or, if it does, that a bigger company won't copy it and tack it onto the SaaS subscription bundle you already have? Or some open source solution will make it irrelevant? Crypto is software that can be anything. And anything a small token creates, a big token can incorporate in a soft or hard fork. Thus market cap is usually king.
Ditto, I'm not too excited about Arqit for just that reason. Just software, no hardware. But Ionq, D-wave, and Rigetti (and a number of big players, Google, IBM, etc) are doing hardware, mixed with software, but not just hardware. And so is/was a company called QPhoton.
Per this https://www.fool.com/investing/2025/01/03/is-quantum-computing-stock-a-buy-right-now/ QUBT acquired QPhoton. For the writer of this article, that wasn't enough. Just another cash grab rebrand like this crypto article he links to https://www.fool.com/investing/2017/12/29/a-dumb-trend-with-bitcoin-and-blockchain-stocks.aspx .
That second article mostly aged well, with one exception: RIOT. The difference between Long Blockchain and Riot Blockchain (later Riot Platforms)? Long never actually bought any bitcoin mining machines (hardware) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Blockchain_Corp . Riot did.
With QPhoton, that previous article didn't specify but QUBT bought hardware with complementary software https://thequantuminsider.com/2022/05/24/quantum-computing-inc-announces-agreement-to-acquire-qphoton/ and https://thequantuminsider.com/2022/06/16/quantum-computing-inc-closes-acquisition-of-qphoton/ . That's what makes it more Riot Blockchain and less Long Blockchain.
What about the origin story? Does it matter that Berkshire Hathaway was a textile manufacturer? No, that was just the direction Buffett first went and the name stuck from then on. I'm not saying QUBT is run by a Buffett-level genius. Just not someone Long-Blockchain-level dumb. Dumb enough to change the name only and basically nothing else.
If I had to guess a long term winner it would likely be Ionq, and stock reflects that. Or Google if the AI, search-engine ensh**tification, and overdue-monopoly busting doesn't destroy it before Willow has a chance to redeem it. But I wouldn't try to guess specific winners because before the dot-com bust I'd probably have guessed Cisco based on the aforementioned. Cisco wasn't a complete loser though is my point. That and QUBT does not seem to be another Long Blockchain.
“
(This is why money is a bad gift - it can be easily returned.)
“
Well, you mentioned Native Americans… What about Asians? They might beg to differ. Note, a lot of it is one-directional. To kids. To newlyweds. Adult to adult outside of events that are not predictably and annually affecting both (holidays and birthdays) is rare. And indeed would negate each other. Newlyweds need money for a house, not air fryers! Every physical gift to a kid is a white elephant the parent will need to put into the toy box at night. Honestly, American consumerism is out of control. If we gave time, homemade gifts, etc. That would be different. But I'm not sold that I need to buy.
Horn of one's own moment for tooting. How prescient was this?
"
Maybe AI will get to that point, but why assume this one company will have the magic (pizza) sauce? Or, if it does, that a bigger company won't copy it and tack it onto the SaaS subscription bundle you already have? Or some open source solution will make it irrelevant?
"
DeepSeek anyone? Third sentence seems pretty on point right now. And who knows, maybe Microsoft/Google takes DeepSeek and improves CoPilot/Gemini, making second point.
I think the deepseek news is being read wrong by the majority of people. It doesn't mean AI /completely/ moves air in or out rapidly. I.e. Sucks or blows. Though I have no idea why this is pejorative. I'm actually quite fond of wind. I'd even say the sensation of recoveiving it, consentually of course, is quite pleasant. Perhaps it is a pejorative against the people who do it, namely those that fan others. That is so non-sensical, I bet anyone who would denegrate such people actually secretly desires and/or partakes in the act.
Regardless, the case for AI is the same, which is perhaps bullish even when looked at clear-eyed perspective that small percentages of productivity improvements are still huge. it means that betting on software can move air rapidly and pejoratively. As any one can do anything, e.g. open source. Hardware like NVDA, or hardware-with-proprietary-software packages like NVDA with CUDA, still win.
I'm so stoked about DeepSeek. A *side project*. Treated as the novelty/incremental step that LLMs largely are - not useless! But in need of scoping. Undercuts the OpenAI cult, probably pushes capital into other realms, it's a win/win/win.