I read that and I found it unconvincing. KP is correct that EZ is, by now, emotionally and perhaps ideologically fixated on AI's approaching reckoning, but that's KP psychologizing about Ed's inner states, which is neither fruitful nor relevant to consider when confronting a reasoned argument (or, in Ed's case, several.)

EZ might have incautiously and incorrectly called the peak several times, but his newsletter is nearly always stacked with citations and insights that, at least to my cursory but frequent inspection, pan out.

His argument(s) have evolved over time, but what of it? That just shows he's not the dogmatist the author wants him to be. Discourse evolves, get over it.

2026 Zitron has a good sense of the scale at which AI is requiring enormous financial complexity and volume to realize, and his basic point is that it isn't sustainable in the medium term.

He is self-evidently correct.