So far, this whole ‘Artificial Intelligence’ mumbo jumbo has been mostly an annoyance. A distraction from more important things.
Important things, like football, for example.
IMHO, if anyone bothers to actually consider the relative importance of football with the importance of AI, football kicks a 50-yard field goal every time. And I won’t even bring up the cheerleaders. Have you noticed the cheerleaders for AI? Old men in suits.
Football has been getting people excited since 1892, back before we even knew about concussions.
But just because AI is “something new”, it seems to be forcing football — and so many other important things — off the Front Page.
In fact, I’m a little bit embarrassed to be writing a column about the “AI Bubble”, when I should be writing about sports. But my goal (as always) is to put the world into meaningful perspective, so my readers can reorient themselves to what’s truly important in 2025. Or even in 2026, if we want to look ahead to a brighter future. Maybe even to the Super Bowl.
The Lamestream Media has been distracting us, however, with stories about the “AI Bubble”. Which is a financial bubble, apparently. Not a financial bubble for people like me, who would much rather invest in an ESPN subscription. But a bubble for people who have more money than they could possibly spend in a lifetime, and who have been investing billions of dollars in something that’s merely a passing fad. An expensive passing fad.
Is there an AI Bubble? Most of us could care less. But the Media thinks we want to know.
The New York Times: “Is There an A.I. Bubble? And What if It Pops?”
NPR: “Here’s why concerns about an AI bubble are bigger than ever”
Bloomberg: “Why Fears of a Trillion-Dollar AI Bubble Are Growing”
I suppose some people have fears about a “Trillion-Dollar AI Bubble”, considering how much money we’re talking about. But we can also be worried about the Denver Broncos. Like, will Pat Surtain return in Week 13 after his pectoral injury? Yes, of course we have fears.
But the way I see it, all these huge data centers they’re building could easily be converted into shopping malls, when the Bubble pops. But no one knows if there really is an AI Bubble. Your guess is as good as mine, and mine is pretty worthless, even after reading the New York Times.
Normally, most people don’t notice financial bubbles until they pop. But we sometimes hear warnings before that happens. Which we will typically ignore, and then we’re sorry afterwards.
It’s true that nowadays a columnist like myself can ask an AI engine to write my story for me, and get a half-ass result within maybe 30 seconds. But what’s the fun in that? It’s like watching someone else play football, except much less satisfying.
Nevertheless, I decided to ask several prominent AI engines to weigh in on the question, “Is There an AI Bubble?” If anyone should know whether there’s an AI Bubble, it ought to be the AI Bubble Itself.
ChatGPT gave a concise introduction, before providing a longer explanation:
Short answer: There are signs of an AI bubble, but it doesn’t look like a pure “hype–only” bubble…
Which I interpret to mean: “Damn right there’s an AI Bubble, but it’s not exactly a Ponzi Scheme, because — as you may have noticed — we actually respond to your prompts and questions, as you may have noticed. So don’t get smart with me.”
Claude.ai gave me this introduction:
This is one of the biggest debates in tech and finance right now, and there are compelling arguments on both sides…
Making it seem like there are two sides to the argument. But if you read the rest of Claude’s analysis, it sure seems like some fishy financial moves are taking place around AI, like companies buying products and services from themselves. “A pattern last seen prominently during the dotcom bubble…”
I don’t mean to brag, but I have never bought something from myself to try and make myself look good. But I have certainly given stuff away, that I didn’t need. Or during the divorce.
This comment is from Gemini, the Google AI engine:
The consensus is that the AI market is in a phase of over-exuberance and speculation that bears the hallmarks of a bubble, particularly in the private market and for pure-play startups with little revenue. However, the underlying technology’s profound potential, coupled with the strong financial stability of the major tech firms driving the investment, makes it unlike a purely speculative mania (like the 17th-century tulip craze)…
Should we feel slightly uncomfortable when a dominant AI platform like Gemini claims “a consensus” that the market is over-exuberant? And when the AI Bubble gets compared to a 17th century tulip craze?
I had never even heard of this “tulip craze”. But then, I’m just a small-town columnist, not an over-exuberant, speculative AI industry that’s getting compared to a tulip farm.
If you’re interested, you can read about the 1734 tulip craze here.
Or better yet, you can catch up on the Broncos, here. They just signed star center Luke Wattenberg to a 4-year extension. Go, Broncos!
Underrated writer Louis Cannon grew up in the vast American West, although his ex-wife, given the slightest opportunity, will deny that he ever grew up at all. You can read more stories on his Substack account.