Be sure to set an alert at 827. There's a good chance you'll get rug pulled if that level breaks, which could happen as soon as tomorrow. Fingers crossed.
cnbc.com It may be time for investors to sell Nvidia on the next bounce, according to the charts Apr. 15th, 2024 Market leader Nvidia (NVDA) has seen its steep uptrend stall, giving way to a consolidation phase that has had a hold since the second week of March. Let’s see what the charts say to do from here. Last week, NVDA saw a successful test of support defined by its March gap, the 50-day moving average, and the daily cloud model. The daily stochastics have turned higher from oversold levels, supporting a bigger oversold bounce in the near term. In contrast to the daily stochastics, there is downturn in the weekly stochastics from overbought territory. This increases risk that a rebound in NVDA will give way to a deeper pullback, with a corrective phase potentially unfolding just in time for the seasonal adage of ‘sell in May, and go away’ to manifest itself in investor behavior. This would imply that investors can hold NVDA, for now, but may want to reduce exposure after a bigger bounce. Final resistance on the chart is near $974, but we would not rule out a move to the psychologically significant $1,000 level before the relief rally fails. Nvidia bounced at one point Monday, but was last down about 1.5% to about $868. NVDA is the third-largest holding in the S&P 500 Index with a weighting of roughly 5%, so a short-term bounce would be a near-term positive for the benchmark. We feel market sentiment has been tied to NVDA this year, even more so than yields, noting NVDA’s most recent pullback coincided with a pullback in sentiment gauges like CNN Money’s Fear & Greed Index. While a short-term bounce in NVDA may temporarily improve sentiment, the 10-day moving average of the Fear & Greed Index has rolled over in an indication that sentiment should deteriorate further after a temporary boost, perhaps for an oversold reading this summer.
theguardian.com From boom to burst, the AI bubble is only heading in one direction | John Naughton No one should be surprised that artificial intelligence is following a well-worn and entirely predictable financial arc. “Are we really in an AI bubble,” asked a reader of last month’s column about the apparently unstoppable rise of Nvidia, “and how would we know?” Good question, so I asked an AI about it and was pointed to Investopedia, which is written by humans who know about this stuff. It told me that a bubble goes through five stages – rather as Elisabeth Kübler-Ross said people do with grief. For investment bubbles, the five stages are displacement, boom, euphoria, profit-taking and panic. So let’s see how this maps on to our experience so far with AI. First, displacement. That’s easy: it was ChatGPT wot dunnit. When it appeared on 30 November 2022, the world went, well, apeshit. So, everybody realised, this was what all the muttering surrounding AI was about! And people were bewitched by the discovery that you could converse with a machine and it would talk (well, write) back to you in coherent sentences. It was like the moment in the spring of 1993 when people saw Mosaic, the first proper web browser, and suddenly the penny dropped: so this was what that “internet” thingy was for. And then Netscape had its initial public offering in August 1995, when the stock went stratospheric and the first internet bubble started to inflate. Second stage: boom. The launch of ChatGPT revealed that all the big tech companies had actually been playing with this AI stuff for years but had been too scared to tell the world because of the technology’s intrinsic flakiness. Once OpenAI, ChatGPT’s maker, had let the cat out of the bag, though, fomo (fear of missing out) ruled. And there was alarm because the other companies realised that Microsoft had stolen a march on them by quietly investing in OpenAI and in so doing had gained privileged access to the powerful GPT-4 large multimodal model. Satya Nadella, the Microsoft boss, incautiously let slip that his intention had been to make Google “dance”. If that indeed was his plan, it worked: Google, which had thought of itself as a leader in machine learning, released its Bard chatbot before it was ready and retreated amid hoots of derision. But the excitement also triggered stirrings in the tech undergrowth and suddenly we saw a mushrooming of startups founded by entrepreneurs who saw the tech companies’ big “foundation” models as platforms on which new things could be built – much as entrepreneurs once saw the web as such a foundational base. These seedlings were funded by venture capitalists in time-honoured fashion, but some of them received large investments from both tech companies and corporations such as Nvidia that were making the hardware on which an AI future can supposedly be built. The third stage of the cycle – euphoria – is the one we’re now in. Caution has been thrown to the winds and ostensibly rational companies are gambling colossal amounts of money on AI. Sam Altman, the boss of OpenAI, started talking about raising $7tn from Middle Eastern petrostates for a big push that would create AGI (artificial general intelligence). He’s also hedging his bets by teaming up with Microsoft to spend $100bn on building the Stargate supercomputer. All this seems to be based on an article of faith; namely, that all that is needed to create superintelligent machines is (a) infinitely more data and (b) infinitely more computing power. And the strange thing is that at the moment the world seems to be taking these fantasies at face value. Which brings us to stage four of the cycle: profit-taking. This is where canny operators spot that the process is becoming unhinged and start to get out before the bubble bursts. Since nobody is making real money yet from AI except those that build the hardware, there are precious few profits to take, save perhaps for those who own shares in Nvidia or Apple, Amazon, Meta, Microsoft and Alphabet (nee Google). This generative AI turns out to be great at spending money, but not at producing returns on investment. Stage five – panic – lies ahead. At some stage a bubble gets punctured and a rapid downward curve begins as people frantically try to get out while they can. It’s not clear what will trigger this process in the AI case. It could be that governments eventually tire of having uncontrollable corporate behemoths running loose with investors’ money. Or that shareholders come to the same conclusion. Or that it finally dawns on us that AI technology is an environmental disaster in the making; the planet cannot be paved with datacentres. But it will burst: nothing grows exponentially for ever. So, going back to that original question: are we caught in an AI bubble? Is the pope a Catholic?
Meh, we hear much about AI because it's a media talking point. But it's also clear that AI will displace thousands of workers. Here in Southeast Asia and India the repercussions are coming with thousands of layoffs from some of the world's largest consulting groups. Sure there are new jobs being created, but it's like 1 for 100 lost I'd guess. Next time you have something to complain about, instead of your hard to understand Indian CS rep, you'll get a friendly all American voice backed by immense data to resolve your issue. But don't worry, if that fails you'll likely get connected to an easier to understand CS rep who used to be the manager but accepted the demotion to keep their job.
I don’t know.. Who is gonna buy their products? I work (as a independent professional contractor) for large government institutions. The one I’m working now, my estimation is that 85/90% of the workers can be automated, it’s really bizar. This automation doesn’t require the latest AI tools, and will for sure be a very large project lasting for years. But it can be all automated. I’m sure there are dozens of examples like this. Why are all these people still working there?
If/when the general market turns back up, I'm buying Nvidia, hopefully at better prices and p/e ratios. Now it's likely to correct more than the market, so maybe some good opportunities for shorts, but I don't daytrade or short stocks, only futures. Stocks are my lazy trader instrument
High unemployment will only likely send jitters through Wall Street. And considering that most of today's wealth is concentrated in the financial market, it would be better to just retain these useless workers than to rock the boat.
Will come a point when workers will revolt against these job displacements. When I read of replacing factory workers with bots, I think it's good idea because labor management is always a nightmare and the cost of labor is high for employers. On the other hand, bots need maintenance (high cost and downtime) and bots don't buy homes or cars, don't shop for food, don't go to restaurants or get hair cuts. With COVID we saw the impact on the local economy when people stay home. Imagine unemployed people. So the companies saving dollars with bots will find themselves with goods they can't sell and a population angry at having been replaced with machines. I have a feeling that's not gonna end well...
Well, you'll need to downsize and readjust your lifestyle. It's gonna be a huge paradigm shift. Don't buy big homes. Don't buy more than 1 car. Don't go out to restaurants every other day. And cut your own damn hair.