Predictions

Nvidia has beaten consistently, and this demand is contracted rather than forecast. Confidence is only moderate because a memory-driven supply miss is a live risk, see F5.

Reported internal lean toward 2027, and $600M of unsold secondary inventory says the private market has not cleared at the current mark. You do not go public into that.

The cleanest natural experiment available on frontier pricing power. If a lab can raise the price of its workhorse model and hold it, the race-to-zero story is wrong, and every model of this industry's margins needs redoing.

The Lean 4 certificates make outright falsity unlikely. A machine-checked proof is hard to argue with. The live risk here is provenance, not correctness: how the results were produced, not whether they hold. That is what T2 tests.

Underpins both the memory thesis and the memory-bound scaling argument. Capacity takes years to build and the orders are already placed, so the supply side cannot surprise inside the window.

The gap between 'results verified' and 'process verified' is the honest criticism nobody is making. Checking a proof tells you it holds; it tells you nothing about how it was found, or what else was tried.

Cadence-based rather than insight-based. The trend line is steep, consistent, and nobody involved has an incentive to stop. The way this fails is a policy shock, not a technical one.

They raised guidance by about $1B mid-year, which implies visibility most software companies never have. The risk is timing rather than demand: government contracts slipping a quarter would do it.

High confidence, because this is an architectural problem rather than a backlog item. Instructions and data share one channel. Until that changes, every defense is a filter. And a filter between a capable search process and its goal becomes part of the search space.

Scale is rentable now. When the compute is a purchase order rather than a moat, incumbency stops holding people, and the reason to stay becomes equity rather than capability.

340% year-on-year growth in attacks, no architectural fix, and agents shipping into production anyway. This is arithmetic rather than prophecy. The uncertainty is disclosure, not occurrence. It will happen; the question is whether anyone says so out loud.

Gartner forecasts over 40% cancellation. That number is unfalsifiable as stated, so this is the same claim rebuilt into a form that can actually be checked.

Secondary-market bid/ask imbalance plus better revenue quality: Anthropic's revenue is more enterprise and more contracted, which is materially easier to underwrite.

The core structural call. Credit is the sensor and equity is the symptom: this build-out began funded by cash flows and is now increasingly funded by debt, and debt reprices before sentiment does.

Tests the Microsoft-concentration thesis from OpenAI's side. Diversifying compute is the tell that the relationship is a supplier arrangement rather than a partnership.

The $500B figure is a target attached to MOUs, and MOU-to-close attrition in infrastructure finance is real. But six institutions with $4T of AUM do not lend their names to a press release they intend to strand, and the demand side (labs converting capex to leases) is visibly forming the same week. One fifth of the headline inside a year is the honest over-under between marketing and a market.

My least confident call, and logged deliberately at 0.60. The interest-rate and over-hiring confound is genuinely hard to separate from an AI effect. At this confidence a miss costs me little and a hit proves little, which is the honest position, not a hedge.