Line MUST go up. If it doesn't you get replaced by someone who will make it go up. There is very deep belief in infinite exponential growth. And not following that belief gets you replaced by someone who shows that belief. And then you stop being paid...
I think it's wrong to characterize this in terms of belief. This is the behavioural outcome of the influential pressure of a systemic structure.
Infinite exponential growth is something we ALL "believe" in when we put a dollar into savings and expect to get a dollar and 5c out the next year.
The problem to me seems more that we tie all sorts of OTHER structural societal constructs to this one. To the degree that if we want to feed ourselves, clothe ourselves, and ensure shelter and security for ourselves and our loved ones - those basic _biological_ needs shared by most moderately sophisticated mammals - we are forced to plug into this system and ensure it delivers on its promise.
I've incorporated that infinite growth expectation into my kid's education plans, into our family retirement plans.
This is not a they issue, this is a we issue. The systemic structure is some parts organic but many parts choice and belief driven by general people on the street.
No, because you're not expecting to get 5c every year regardless of your investment. In this example, they want 5% of their initial investment. So, $100 becomes $105 the next year, the $105 becomes $110.25 the year after that, and so on. 1.05^years. The fact that economic growth is measured as a percentage implies an exponential.
You say this, but oracle, ibm, microsoft, google, facebook, intel, etc etc are obvious counterexamples. Nobody got fired for hiring whatever brand it is the phrase says people are supposed to hire.
Oracle is using AI as a way to justify their pivot into becoming a Tier 1 Hyperscaler - Oracle Cloud now represents 50% of Oracle's overall revenue.
Becoming a hyperscaler is expensive (compute is pricey and a massive fixed cost), and by building an AI Infra story, Oracle can make a valid case as to why I should give Oracle money to expand their DC capacity.
Additionally, OCI has been landing marquee logos like a major cybersecurity company who's name starts with C and a global rideshare platform, and is taking advantage of enterprise customers who are price sensitive or investing in a secondary cloud provider to reduce vendor dependency.
Indeed. And not only that, all this capex has wrecked their balance sheet. They were in the software licensing printing money business, now they are in the burn huge amounts of money building data centers hoping someone will use them business. Even if people did use them, the margins aren't that great anyway - especially compared to their former software business.
They are a software vendor, and the theory goes all the software vendors will go away, because AI will just build your business software on the fly. So they are trying to "become AI"!
Also Oracle is owned by Larry Ellison and hes in a competition with the other tech bros.
Well, I'm sure they were when "cloud" was the latest buzzword in public company reporting. Now that its AI I'm sure the next quarterly will show massive (fabricated by reshuffling) growth in their AI initiative.
