Why? It turns out that I try to read people who have a different perspective than I do. Why am I trying to read everything that just confirms my current biases?

(Unless those writings are looking to dehumanize or strip people of rights or inflame hate - I'm not talking about propaganda or hate speech here.)

You realize this “dumb blogspot” is written by the most successful writer in the industry as far as revenue from a paid newsletter? He has had every major tech CEO on his podcast and he is credited for being the inspiration for Substack.

The Substack founders unofficially marketed it early on as “Stratechery for independent authors”.

Your analysis concerning the technology instead of focusing on the business is about like Rob Malda not understanding the success of the “no wireless, less space than the Nomad lame”.

Even if you just read this article, he never argued that Google didn’t have the best technology, he was saying just the opposite. Nvidia is in good shape precisely because everyone who is not Google is now going to have to spend more on Nvidia to keep up.

He has said that AI may turn out to be a “sustaining innovation” first coined by Clay Christenson and that the big winners may be Google, Meta, Microsoft and Amazon because they can leverage their pre-existing businesses and infrastructure.

Even Apple might be better off since they are reportedly going to just throw a billion at Google for its model.

> spew out their nonsense theories

Discussing "innovator's dilemma" unironically is a fullstop for me.