Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Scenarica's avatar

The psychohistory reference deserves the structural footnote Asimov built into the novels. Psychohistory only works when the population being predicted doesnt know the predictions. The moment predictions become public, actors adjust behaviour and the forecast invalidates itself. AI financial prediction has the same reflexivity constraint. A model that beats Polymarket today moves the market tomorrow, and the market it moves is no longer the market it modelled.

Thats the specific limit of Dave's financial singularity thesis. If every mega-fund runs the same models on the same data, their predictions converge. Converging predictions eliminate the edge that made them profitable. AI prediction at scale produces its own counterparty. The model improves and the market adapts in lockstep, compressing the advantage until the only remaining edge is the speed at which you retrain. Psychohistory was fiction precisely because Asimov understood this problem. AI forecasting will have to solve what Asimov chose to assume away.

Ex-Consultant in Tech's avatar

The thread I’d pull harder is that almost every story here is really about who controls the feedback loop. SpaceX is not just “space + AI infra.” It potentially controls launch, satellites, connectivity, compute access, and eventually the physical layer for a lot of frontier workloads. TikTok/Douyin are not just entertainment apps; they are giant behavioral/video data engines. ChatGPT + Plaid is not just personal finance advice; it is a claim on financial intent data.

10 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?