He's right about the AI, but "Instead they should really focus on Apple Vision Pro" is a really good way to make absolutely EVERYTHING else you say seem wrong too.

At their very core, Large Language Models' costs run contrary to basically every model of selling software.

Consumers and enterprises alike have been trained to pay a monthly fee for a service, and while these services might have limits or strictures, basically nobody buying software expects to have a metered service, let alone one that's both metered and with hard to measure costs.

LLMs burn tokens at a per-million rate regardless of whether or not you get the response you want, or whether it does what you ask it to do. If you ask a coding agent to do some sort of software task and it goes off and spins its wheels in a loop, you're paying for the tokens regardless.

AI companies knew that consumers would never pay the actual cost of their AI services, so they have, for the most part, sold them monthly subscriptions with vague rate limits that allow them to burn way more in tokens than the cost of their subscription. SemiAnalysis found that you can burn hundreds of dollars on a $20-a-month subscription and thousands of dollars on a $200-a-month subscription, and while AI boosters will claim that these companies have "70% gross margins on tokens," there is little proof that this is the case, and my own reporting shows that OpenAI lost $20.9 billion on $13.07 billion in revenue in 2025.

and its COO said that it was getting “harder to justify” the cost of AI because it was hard to track the cost of AI to any actual useful features shipping.

It seems that we’re finally sliding down to the trough of disillusionment.

SemiAnalysis found that you can burn hundreds of dollars on a $20-a-month subscription and thousands of dollars on a $200-a-month subscription

Not to mention there's millions of free user that will never pay for any token but still burn through token(electricity and clean water!) for stupidly mundane stuff that is achievable either via searching the internet, or simply asking human. Those are the money that can only be earn back via sneaky ads, else it's considered loss.

The future is rather interesting to watch, and i really wish i'm not part of it.

has been described by Politico as the AI boom's most "acerbic gadfly"

The AI boom is about as real as the Metaverse boom.

I've seen researchers and academics prefer 'AI spring' to contrast with the AI winter of the last few decades to highlight the change in research and development spending, without the 'successful market' implications of the word 'boom'. Can't really call it a 'boom' when you're losing billions a day.

Famously thought Apple would release a TV and a car for like a decade. I hope he's right but he's got a track record.

When it works, it's genuinely awesome. But that's a load-bearing when.

I like this better than saying “that ‘when’ is doing some heavy lifting”.