"Q:We heard a stat recently that if you combine SpaceX, OpenAI, Anthropic potential IPOs, inflation adjusted, these are so large, they're as big as all the IPOs in the nineties combined. What do you think about that?

"A: I think that the excitement surrounding the potentialities of artificial intelligence dwarf the excitement generated by the worldwide web and by the internet and by fibre-optic cables. And I think the dollars, of course, even when adjusted for inflation are larger today. And I think that the role of the Fed[eral Reserve Bank] is more intrusive, more problematical than it was then. And I think that a great deal is riding on the efficacy of the technology on which the world's hopes are hanging. And a great deal is also contingent on whether we collectively have correctly calculated (or miscalculated) the demand for tokens, for data centres, and for the rest of the capital that goes into artificial intelligence.

"So you know, you'd think that any technology with 'intelligence' in the very word would be up to date [on the] supply and demand [for it]. But I think there's reason to doubt that. I think there's a great deal of overbuilding, double ordering, just like there was in the late 1990s [with the Dot.Com bubble]. People thought, well, such is the high degree of organisation of all the information relevant to the marketplace that there will be nothing like the macro miscalculations of yesteryear. But it turns out that the human speculative spirit is a pretty wild thing and is not necessarily grounded by better technology.

"On the contrary, sometimes that can only incite it. So I think that [this] today is one of the greatest bubbles of all time. ...

"A guy from Uber, a COO of Uber, a CFO, was quoted the other day as saying, well, it's it's certainly a wondrous technology. We don't see it in our profit and loss. We can't really rationalise the expense just now. This is all kind of the jury's still out on this. It's wonderful -- it's not wonderful; it is hallucinating -- it is smarter than you ever dreamt ...

"What we do know is that the capital draw on AI is as great as it was on the [nineteenth-century] railroad [boom]. And the value proposition of railroads is very simple ...Now it is what? AI, augmenting human intelligence, planning it?

"We don't know. But the capital draw is immense, and there are dollars that are riding on the success of this and on the correct calculation of supply and demand for semiconductors, for data centres and the like. All this is terrifically important and also unknowable at the moment. So this makes it a time well worth living in."

What Defines an Asset Bubble? What Got Us Out of the Depression? - ROBERT MURPHY SHOW

"... some notion of irrationality or mania intrinsic to it is ... a required ingredient [of an asset bubble]. Because if you don't have that, it's not a bubble. And and that's how I use the term. 

"So, for example, as opposed to a boom. ...  like if they got rid of the IRS ... and we're sure it's not coming back. I think that would lead to an economic boom, but that wouldn't be a bubble. Okay, there might be a bubble involved if it overshoots ... I wouldn't call that a bubble because a bubble's going to pop. Like that's the whole point. That's why they call it that ...

"I would say for it to be a bubble where it unmoored from the fundamentals, and people kind of know it is. ...[that] at some point, this is going to crash hard, but as long as you think you can get out, it can keep going. And so, to me that's clearly a bubble. And again, I think a necessary ingredient of that is there some element that people know this is unmoored from reality.  ... 

" I'm going to say I don't think loose money or government interference or whatever is a part of the definition. ... [T]here could be a bubble even in An-Capistan if there could just be a mania. That could happen, but I think it would be relatively modest, other things being equal, for the same amount of irrationality and willingness to take a gamble or whatever ...

[H]aving a Federal Reserve Bank thrown into the mix is only going to allow that irrationality to get multiplied... So, the biggest bubbles are necessarily going to go along with a central bank."

Rosie O’Donnell will have to spend even more time in Donald Trump’s America soon.

The far-Left radical has been tapped to guest host on “Jimmy Kimmel Live!’ while Kimmel goes on his traditional summer break.

Kimmel allegedly hand-picked O’Donnell due to her endless feud with the current president.

“And, as a special treat for our commander-in-chief, I asked one of his all-time favorites, Rosie O’Donnell, to be here to keep the hits coming.”

Those “hits” include laugh-free monologues brimming with DNC talking points, misdirection and outright lies. One of the latter got Kimmel benched for a week last year.

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=kimmel+toto

ABC continues to prop up Kimmel despite the show’s rage-based approach to late-night television. He’s become like Robert De Niro, a once respected performer whose brand is now permanently tied to a president.

De Niro is 82 with a lifetime of bravura performances to his credit. Where the 58-year-old Kimmel goes after Trump leaves office is anyone’s guess.

The bigger issue involves O’Donnell’s ABC duties. In short, just how unhinged will she be allowed to go?

ROSIE O’DONNELL says Trump will manufacture disaster to cancel midterms: “…He will have some sort of crisis, whether it’s an assassination attempt or a terrorist bombing. There will be some catastrophic event, and he will say there will be no elections.”

— The Washington Times (@WashTimes) June 20, 2026

Yes, Kimmel’s anti-Trump monologues are crazed and one-dimensional. They still teeter on the edge of sanity, using real-world headlines to fuel their alleged yuks.

O’Donnell goes far beyond that via her social media feed.

She suggested two years ago that the Butler, Pa. assassination attempt on the president was staged, a view that puts her into “Flat Earth” territory.

Late last year, she claimed that the president’s verbal mockery of a female reporter equated to “rape.”

Days ago, O’Donnell told far-Left former reporter Jim Acosta that Trump stole the 2024 election, without a scintilla of evidence. She also predicted Trump would cancel the upcoming midterm elections.

Once again, she didn’t have anything in the neighborhood of proof to back up her claims.

Just anger.

She often shares her crazed opinions on minor outlets, be it TikTok or Acosta’s CNN-free showcase.

Now, she’ll be on a broadcast TV network with all the power that “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” can offer. She’ll have her own writing staff and a corporate budget to do or say almost anything.

Imagine that.

So who will rein her in and be the adult in the room? Will ABC suits stand up to O’Donnell, and tell her what’s professional to share and what’s out of bounds?

If ABC’s “The View” is any indication, O’Donnell will have no one to hold her accountable.

By the time Kimmel returns from vacation, he might sound like a reasonable voice compared to his temporary replacement.

The post How Crazy Will Rosie O’Donnell Get as Kimmel’s Replacement? appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

"There is a great, basic contradiction in the teachings of Jesus. Jesus was one of the first great teachers to proclaim the basic principle of individualism--the inviolate sanctity of man's soul, and the salvation of one's soul as one's first concern and highest goal; this means one's ego and the integrity of one's ego. But when it came to the next question, a code of ethics to observe for the salvation of one's soul--(this means: what must one do in actual practice in order to save one's soul?)--Jesus (or perhaps His interpreters) gave men a code of altruism, that is, a code which told them that in order to save one's soul, one must love or help or live for others. This means, the subordination of one's soul (or ego) to the wish-es, desires or needs of others, which means the subordination of one's soul to the souls of others.

"This is a contradiction that cannot be resolved. This is why men have never succeeded in applying Christianity in practice, while they have preached it in theory for two thousand years. The reason of their failure was not men's natural depravity or hypocrisy, which is the superficial (and vicious) explanation usually given. The reason is that a contradiction cannot be made to work. That is why the history of Christianity has been a continuous civil war both literally (between sects and nations), and spiritually (within each man's soul).

"The solution? We have a choice. Either we accept the basic principle of Jesus—the pre-eminence of one's own soul—and define a new code of ethics consistent with it (a code of Individualism). Or we accept altruism and the basic principle which it implies—the conception of man as a sacrificial animal, whose purpose is service to others, to the herd (which is what you may see in Europe right now [at the end of a World War]—and which is certainly not what Jesus intended)....

"One may approach my philosophy from either one of two angles. If we assume that man was created by God, then man must live on earth according to his nature and to the rational faculty which God gave him as his distinguishing attribute and his only means of survival. Therefore, accepting an Individualist code of ethics, one would carry out God’s will and be a truly religious and moral person. Or we may assume that there is no God, that all we know is that we are men, we are here on earth, and it is up to us to enjoy it or to destroy ourselves. Then we still must live according to our nature and our rational faculty, and accept the highest perfection of man (defined by our reason) as our standard of morality. My code of ethics will apply and will hold in either case."

~ Ayn Rand in a letter to a fan, July 9, 1946, collected in Ayn Rand Letters