Charitably the lag time for this technology to have noticeable effects could just be ~5 years away. Similarly to how computers didn't have a big impact for a decade after they were introduced as people got used to using them.

Your grandparent comment:

> Take any stock index, remove AI stocks, what do you see? That's right! Nothing...

Parent comment:

> Now remove the companies selling the AI shovels: https://pbs.twimg....

From your linked image, "excluding AI stocks" is "+16%" (the figure with AI stocks is far higher).

Your sole source says +16% excluding AI - in what kind of market is +16% “nothing”?

> in what kind of market is +16% “nothing”?

It's nothing because it happens all the time, it's not statically relevant, like not at all: https://www.macrotrends.net/2526/sp-500-historical-annual-re...

This forum is full of techies with very strong opinions about their toys but 0 economical, political or historical education, and it shows

Those kind of returns would generally be considered at least ‘good’ even if they weren't excluding some of the best performing stocks such as AI as was done here. Some periods truly have no returns or even negative returns, even without excluding some of the best performing stocks like was done here.

And even more so since inflation was 2-3%, not considered high, during most of that period.

Is the image you provided depicting revenue, or stock value? My point is about revenue.

Revenues don't matter when you sell a dollar for 50ct and half of the deals are circular anyways

So you're claiming that the revenue growth of the S&P 500 over the last few years is largely due to "selling dollars for 50ct" and circular deals?

Yes.

https://insights.som.yale.edu/insights/this-is-how-the-ai-bu...

> AI-related stocks have accounted for 75% of S&P 500 returns, 80% of earnings growth and 90% of capital spending growth since ChatGPT launched in November 2022.

has it occurred to you that AI companies may be making huge returns because AI is genuinely increasing productivity and driving actual economic growth via their products?

If all these false practices can pull revenue out of nothing, why doesn’t every company do it? How come AI companies seem to be able to pull off financial magic that no other company can match?

All your analyses still ignore the revenue point.

But then why don’t we see this productivity growth in any other statistics? In layoffs or in faster GDP growth or in new software products?

> has it occurred to you that AI companies may be making huge returns because AI is genuinely increasing productivity and driving actual economic growth via their products?

Then why can't anyone point at actual numbers? The best we get is "look: line go up" while pointing at either the companies selling the AI shovels or the companies selling $1 of tokens for 50ct.

When cars replaced horses we didn't have to twist the numbers to understand the benefits. When emails replaced mails we didn't have to do 6 hours of mental gymnastics to see the increased productivity. Heck my grandma could tell the benefits of computers when the town hall she worked for finally discontinued typewriters

They're spending hundreds of billions if not trillions, and have nothing to show for it besides like 5 stocks pumping like shit coins. On top of the the drawbacks are massive and very visible...