Unlike past platform shifts that caught many off-guard, the AI wave is universally anticipated. This 'consensus innovation' intensifies all existing competitive pressures, as every investor—from mega-funds to accelerators—is aggressively pursuing the same perceived opportunities, pushing factors like Power Law belief to an extreme.

The unusual tandem rise of gold (a safe haven) and tech stocks (risk-on) is explained by Vanguard's Joe Davis as the market pricing in two divergent possibilities: a pessimistic, deficit-driven slump and an optimistic, AI-fueled boom, dismissing a moderate middle ground.

Today's massive AI company valuations are based on market sentiment ("vibes") and debt-fueled speculation, not fundamentals, just like the 1999 internet bubble. The market will likely crash when confidence breaks, long before AI's full potential is realized, wiping out many companies but creating immense wealth for those holding the survivors.

A 2022 study by the Forecasting Research Institute has been reviewed, revealing that top forecasters and AI experts significantly underestimated AI advancements. They assigned single-digit odds to breakthroughs that occurred within two years, proving we are consistently behind the curve in our predictions.

The current AI boom isn't just another tech bubble; it's a "bubble with bigger variance." The potential for massive upswings is matched by the risk of equally significant downswings. Investors and founders must have an unusually high tolerance for risk and volatility to succeed.

The rare agreement between libertarian billionaire Elon Musk and socialist senator Bernie Sanders on AI's threat to jobs is a significant indicator. This consensus from the political fringe suggests the issue's gravity is being underestimated by mainstream policymakers and is a sign of a profound, undeniable shift.

Extreme conviction in prediction markets may not be just speculation. It could signal bets being placed by insiders with proprietary knowledge, such as developers working on AI models or administrators of the leaderboards themselves. This makes these markets a potential source of leaked alpha on who is truly ahead.

Joe Davis argues the economy faces a "tug of war" between an AI-driven boom and a deficit-fueled slump. He believes the mainstream forecast of stable 2% growth and 2% inflation is the least likely outcome, with an over 80% chance of a material change in the economic environment.

While AI investment has exploded, US productivity has barely risen. Valuations are priced as if a societal transformation is complete, yet 95% of GenAI pilots fail to positively impact company P&Ls. This gap between market expectation and real-world economic benefit creates systemic risk.