> I dislike this dramatization in reporting of mundane facts.

Okay, but this isn't a news article, it's an opinion piece on some guy's substack.

There may be an arrogance that we're not vulnerable to these tactics because the topics of conversation are science and tech focused, rather than celebrity culture.

However this post and the comments really debunk that - here we have a clear example of the author turning these people into characters, archetypes of reality tv, and inviting the reader to have an emotional response to what is potentially interesting, but actually just the mundane business matter of dealing with demand spikes.

A normal conversation might take a step back, above the emotional baiting, and instead lament on how TSMC weren't able to develop sufficient supply capacity in time to maximise yield across not just these clients, but many others whom are looking to get involved in the AI hype train. Instead we're seeing something quite different, and quite uninformed. It's reading like a gossip post from an instagram thread.

I notice that HN is actually more vulnerable to these types of conversations. Maybe it's because HN likely weights towards an ASD audience, which has less experience in handling socially driven narratives. I do definitely see here more of the "one-sided" conversation that is typical of ASD.

I hate this writing as well. Is not about technology and finance? The reporter writes as if it is a novel.

Clickbait permeates all things. Next thing you know they'll be adding ____ (insert favorite controversial world leader) enraged to the headline.

The most important signal is actually that demand is far exceeding supply and there is no AI Bubble