What actually happened is that market cap declined by that amount, where market cap of course is just latest share price multiplied by shares outstanding.
Nobody should be surprised or care that this number fluctuates, which is why certain people try really hard to make it seem more interesting than it really is. Otherwise they'd be out of a job.
Also known as mark-to-market. Especially with the cyclical deals with stock at fictional (ie. never sold at that price) valuations, that are now all the rage.
With the pace of inflation we have been witnessing over the past years $1T has become unimpressive. Let's talk percentages. And if somebody wants to talk about absolute numbers, they should talk not only about negatives, but positives too, as in how much the stock market has gained before losing that $1T.
This narrative that retail is constantly panicking and selling every time the market drops is it based in anything? I'm under the impression the massive volume of buying/selling every day is institutional, and institutional investors/hedge funds are the ones constantly adjusting based on how data moves.
Yes...NVDA closed at $188.15 yesterday, a price it was never at until October. It did hit $212.19 last week, but retreated.
After spring 2023, Nvidia stock seems to follow a pattern. It has a run-up prior to earnings, it beats the forecast, with the future forecast replaced with an even more amazing forecast, and then the stock goes down for a bit. It also has runs - it went up in the first half of 2024, as well as from April to now.
Who knows how much longer it can go on, but I remember 1999 and things were crazier then. In some ways things were crazier three years ago with FAANG salaries etc. There is a lot of capital spending, the question is are these LLMs with some tweaking worth the capital spending, and it's too early to tell that fully. Of course a big theoretical breakthrough like the utility of deep learning, or transformers or the like would help, but those only come along every few years (if at all).
It's so strange that a site full of software developers reacts so harshly to the idea of robots. What exactly is it you people think you are building? You automate stuff for a living.
Is it okay to automate sales and customer service and marketing, but warehouse workers are where you draw the line? Do you have any idea how many jobs this industry has already "killed"?
we realized that we don't want all the money/profit to circulate around the top 10 tech companies in the world where all of us are out of the equation...
HN isn't a monoculture. Many people visit this website to hear the criticism from a diverse constituent of software developers. If you expect any unanimous conclusion, I'd argue your expectations are the strange one.
My foremost concern is that robots, particularly American-made ones, aren't ready for primetime yet. Human bodies solve problems that aren't easily automated even with a perfectly capable humanoid robot and AI-powered IK solver. I've worked in the computer vision and factory automation fields, and outside a completely automated redesign I don't think robots will significantly reduce headcount in this field.
It's so strange that a site full of entertainment workers reacts so harshly to the idea of Madame Web. What exactly is it you people think you are making?
Well, a the scale at which AI and other things are proceeding to replace humans just for the sake of saving money for few top earning people. It's horrible. I shall say you should ban AI for most of the things where it can help solve issues! Now that's upto to humanity how it want to keep people eating food or have a proper life
Because I care when those people land on the street.
Unfortunately something I have seen happening a few times in our capitalism society where only shareholders happiness matters, hitting those quarter goals of exponential growth.
Not everyone thinks of others as disposable resources.
Software jobs replaced administrative white collar jobs where instead of the bureaucracy being human interaction and paper forms, it is computerized and encoded in malleable and evolving code.
Sales underwent consolidation where the same human interactions scaled to bigger deals. Customer service was outsourced. Marketing still remains a mysticism with no clear evidence of a return on investment.
This news topic is also a thinly veiled replacement outsourcing. The engineers involved will replace these roles. When the robots fail, it will most likely have foreign pilots taking control.
The barrier to entry only gets higher, and the people left behind are stuck in a donut hole.
And has meant that some professions are basically dead and fewer people are in lots of jobs. The folks that lose jobs aren't generally qualified for the jobs that opened and aren't always even located in the same country.
And that happens with a lot of advances. Creates but also takes away.
…Yes? Someone needs to design the robots, build the robots, administer and direct the robots, repair and maintain the robots, evaluate the performance of and improve upon the existing design of the robots… not to mention write the software that controls the robots in the first place, design the UI that users use to interface with the robots…
Pre WW2 the USA had skid rows and flop houses full of men who didn't make the cut to the new industrialized economy. People literally rented a rope to lean on for the night. WW2 changed things for the US where that was no longer a common thing.
People fear that we are heading back into that, with no plan other than 'things turned out fine last time this happened' ignoring the, you know, skid row, flop houses, etc and no idea what the magic jobfairy will bring us to be these new, magically appearing 'jobs to come'.
The cotton gin is the literal textbook example of a technology that ethically backfires and induces magnitudes greater suffering than what it was intended to obviate. It saved and expanded the institution of chattel slavery in the USA.
Read the comic again, your right to free speech has nothing to do with your privilege of using the public airwaves.
The FCC chairs' threat to ABC is about the later, not about arresting executives or Kimmel like one would expect if you read the comic then your comment.
The comic is incomplete, the first amendment also protects content based discrimination in government interactions outside of certain exceptions. It does not require arrest.
For example in the granting of permits for marches.
