Martin Shkreli dismisses the biohacking trend of using peptides. He argues that without rigorous data on pharmacokinetics—how a substance is metabolized and its half-life—one doesn't have a medicine, but a delusion. He criticizes enthusiasts for ignoring the foundational science required for any pharmaceutical.
While AI may devalue software companies backed by private credit, this won't trigger a 2008-style crisis. The argument is that these losses will be contained within the software sector. Furthermore, AI's broad productivity gains will likely create an economic expansion that outweighs the damage to these specific portfolios.
Andrew Feldman, CEO of competitor Cerebras, argues their single wafer-scale chip is superior for large AI models. He contends that connecting thousands of smaller GPUs, as Nvidia does, introduces significant latency from physical wiring that negates on-paper performance specs, creating a fundamental bottleneck.
The US is allowing Nvidia to sell advanced chips to China again. The strategic calculus has shifted from simple resource hoarding to geopolitics: keeping China dependent on Taiwan's TSMC makes an invasion less likely, as it would destroy the very supply chain China needs for its AI ambitions.
The critique of the peptide trend often misses that users aren't taking unknown chemicals. Many use compounds like Retatrutide, which is already in Phase 3 clinical trials by Eli Lilly. They are essentially front-running the FDA approval process for drugs that already have substantial clinical backing.
Apple is cracking down on AI-powered coding apps like Replit, not just for rule violations, but for strategic reasons. The underlying motive is to prevent these tools from empowering developers to easily create web apps that exist outside and compete with the lucrative App Store ecosystem, thus bypassing Apple's revenue model.