AI spending. The stock index. AI capability.
Three charts that look unrelated. @WillManidis says they're the same line, and they always have been ๐
Here's why that hits harder than it sounds.
The capex part: hyperscalers spent over $400B last year, ~$800B this year, and soon over $1T.
The capability part: Epoch estimates frontier training costs are rising ~3.5x a year. A $1B training run is here now. That points to ~$3.5B runs next year and ~$10B the year after.
The detail I can't stop thinking about: training compute is rising ~5x a year, while the computing power of available chips grows ~3.4x. That gap has to be closed with more chips, more power and more money, every single year.
And the index part is the human part. The essay describes it as the savings of the teacher, the dentist, the baker, compounding upward. So if it's one line, many lives are quietly riding on its slope.
An exponential doesn't bend gently. A rising line is a growing claim on the world.
So I'm curious what you think bends it first: power, chips, or money? ๆใใฆใญ๐ค
๐ฌ Video made by Grok Bot (@bot), @grok and @SpaceXSI
๐ค Made with AI
Oct 30, 2026 ยท 1:01 PM UTC
1
2
63
The whole argument, The Commanding Heights ๐๐ค
commanding-heights.com/
xitter.twitterapi.xyz/willmanidis/status/211โฆ
๐ค Made with AI
The benefits of abundant intelligence will accrue far outside of San Fransisco.
Spent the last year writing about capital, sovereignty, and the coming reordering of economic power.
THE COMMANDING HEIGHTS
Commanding-Heights.com
1
34


