Zero Rss

Broadcom Crashes After AI Chip Revenue Forecast Misses

Broadcaom stock is plunging in after-hours trading, after the company reported Q2 results which delivered a disappointing forecast for AI chip revenue, signaling that the company is either progressing more slowly than anticipated in the burgeoning industry, or that unlike its peers, is actually truthful in predicting the potential of the AI bubble.

The historicals were ok: in the fiscal second quarter, which ended May 3, sales rose 48% to $22.2 billion, just barely beating the $22.1 estimate. AI semiconductor revenue was $10.8 billion, also just barely above estimates of $10.7 billion. That category includes custom-built accelerators - the chips used to develop and run AI models - as well as networking semiconductors. Adjusted EPS climbed to $2.44 a share, also modestly beat the median estimate of $2.39.

But the forecast was a problem: AI semiconductor revenue will be $16 billion in the fiscal third quarter, missing analyst estimates of $17.2 billion. Total revenue will be about $29.4 billion, which while higher than the $28.6 billion median estimate was below some buyside bogeys which ranged billions of dollars higher. EBITDA guidance of 68.0%, also missed the street at 69.1%.

The forecast miss is concerning: Broadcom has signed and expanded long-term deals with companies like Google, Anthropic and Meta but questions remain as to how much revenue will be recognized in each quarter, as opposed to being accounted for in a multiyear backlog. 

Investors were also disappointed after the company kept its full year AI target at 10GW in 2027 and $100BN in chip sales for the full year, instead of boosting guidance as it had in prior quarters. The pressure was also margin related as GOOGL TPU growth generating lower margins than networking and software. 

CEO Hock Tan has tied the company’s fortunes to AI gear, betting on a rapid expansion of data centers and other infrastructure. While Nvidia remains the dominant maker of AI accelerators, Broadcom has positioned itself as a key alternative. 

In hopes of boosting its operational leverage, Broadcom has been taking a bigger role helping finance the purchase of chips. As Bloomberg reported over the weekend, Apollo and Blackstone are working on a roughly $36 billion debt financing deal to help Anthropic pay for its Google chips that Broadcom helped develop. Broadcom is backstopping payments on the largest portions of the transaction, Bloomberg reported. So we have yet another circular deal: Broadcom is funding the SPV that will allow Anthropic to pay Google for Broadcom chips. You can see why the entire AI industry is now so careful about even the smallest drawdown: if even the smallest cracks appear, questions will once again start swirling about risk and ROI, and now that there are over $600BN in private credit SPV backstopping future growth, the entire house of cards could come crashing down.

Against that backdrop, the latest report failed to satisfy investors, with the stock crashing over 12% in late trading, erasing all the recent "gamma squeeze" gains orchestrated by market makers to set the stage for the coming mega IPOs. It was up 38% this year through the close; those gains have been cut in half after the results. 

 

While Broadcom has made progress in pivoting to artificial intelligence customers, it finds itself against increasingly cutthroat competition and higher expectations. Broadcom added roughly $270 billion in market value over the last five trading sessions before the earnings report, fueled by AI optimism. All of that has been wiped out. 

Tyler Durden Wed, 06/03/2026 - 18:18

SPLC Employee Funneled $1.2 Million To Neo-Nazi Lover - And More: DOJ Superseding Indictment

The Southern Poverty Law Center built a massive empire - ballooning to over $787 million in assets - by promising donors it was the frontline defender against "hate" and white supremacy. But according to the Department of Justice's superseding indictment, the organization allegedly funneled millions in tax-exempt donor dollars to the very extremists it publicly condemned.

The Juiciest Revelation: The $1.2 Million Romantic Entanglement

One of the most shocking details involves "F-9" - a field source affiliated with the neo-Nazi National Alliance. The SPLC allegedly paid this individual over $1.2 million while F-9 was in a romantic relationship with an SPLC employee.

While on the SPLC payroll, F-9 reportedly continued raising funds for the National Alliance.

1⃣ NATIONAL ALLIANCE

SPLC paid over $1.2M to "F-9," who was in a romantic relationship with an SPLC employee

While receiving SPLC donors' money, F-9 also raised funds for the National Alliance.

5/20

- Tyler O'Neil (@Tyler2ONeil) June 3, 2026 Other Damning Allegations From The Superseding Indictment

• F-30 (Nazi/KKK/Aryan Nations leader): Paid more than $70K after asking to leave the movement. Instead, the SPLC allegedly kept them on salary to host rallies, recruit, and publish extremist material.
• F-31 & F-32 (KKK members): Wanted out in 2010 but were allegedly bribed to stay active. Funds reimbursed cross-burning materials, including wood and fuel, and helped them gain leadership roles.
• F-37 (Unite the Right): Paid over $300K. This individual was in the leadership chat for the 2017 Charlottesville rally, made racist posts under SPLC supervision, and arranged transportation for attendees.
• F-42 (Neo-Nazi National Alliance chairman): Received $155K+ while simultaneously listed on the SPLC's own "Extremist File" webpage.
• Additional payments: Approximately $350K to a National Socialist Movement officer and $19K to American Front's national president, a convicted cross-burning felon.

READ IT

The Justice Department just secured a superseding indictment against the Southern Poverty Law Center, and it reveals some new bombshells

1/20

- Tyler O'Neil (@Tyler2ONeil) June 3, 2026 The Bigger Picture: Alleged Hate-For-Profit Machine

The DOJ alleges the SPLC used fictitious entities and shell accounts, including fake "Rare Books" employment covers, to conceal payments totaling over $4 million. Donors were told the money would dismantle extremism - instead, it allegedly sustained rallies, recruitment, racist paraphernalia, and living expenses for extremists. The organization is accused of making payments amounting to over $1 million to a National Alliance affiliate, more than $300,000 to an Aryan Nations affiliate, $270,000 to a “Unite the Right” member, $140,000 to a former National Alliance chairman, $73,000 to former KKK members, and $19,000 to an American Front president and felon.

This ties into charges of wire fraud, false statements to banks, and conspiracy to commit concealment money laundering. Upon conviction, the SPLC could forfeit assets traceable to the alleged scheme.

The SPLC has denied wrongdoing, calling the program legitimate intelligence-gathering that has since been discontinued, and framing the case as political retaliation.

Tyler Durden Wed, 06/03/2026 - 18:00

Federal Inspection Reportedly Finds Delaney Hall In Compliance On Virtually All Standards

Authored by Jonathan Turley via JonathanTurley.org,

Democratic Governor Mikie Sherrill has repeatedly claimed that conditions in the Delaney Hall ICE facility are abhorrent, inhuman, and intolerable. Democratic leaders claimed that the conditions were so horrific that there was a hunger strike going on.

As is often the case, there is a closed loop of information fueling such claims. The media ran allegations from advocacy groups, politicians repeated the media reports as fact, and then lawyers cited both as the basis for a lawsuit to shut down the site. The problem is an actual federal inspection that found the facility to be in compliance with virtually every standard.

The most recent investigative report conducted by the DHS Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) found compliance with 17 out of 22 standards. The errors were comparatively minor to the sweeping claims made by Sherrill and others.

The investigation, performed by six OPR officers and four outside contractors, found only 5 areas of violation, including ice buildup in the freezers, fingerprinting omissions, and improper labeling of cleaning equipment.

Moreover, ICE has supplied records showing that state officials have been allowed into the facility for their own inspections, releasing proof from a May 28 visit. Despite such access, Democratic politicians and activists continued to spread the false claim that there have been no such inspections, rotting food, and disgusting conditions.

In support of the state lawsuit, Sherrill proclaimed

"If the GEO Group - with a $1 billion government contract - has nothing to hide and the conditions inside Delaney Hall are as safe and as sanitary as this private corporation and the Trump Administration claim, then there is no legitimate reason why my health inspectors are being kept from full access throughout the building. The people of New Jersey deserve transparency and accountability, and I will continue using all the power of this office to advocate for the detainees and their families."

The complaint generally refers to public reports as the basis for the action:

"Since then, public reporting has raised significant concerns about public health conditions in the facility, including overcrowding and lack of ventilation; lack of or inadequate medical care or hygiene practices; unsanitary food and drink preparation and storage; and the unchecked spread of communicable diseases like COVID-19 and Influenza."

That will make for an interesting hearing on the new lawsuit, where the court may question the good-faith accounts made in filings or public statements. The complaint is notably framed in vague terms about the underlying claims and the sources for those allegations.

It notably only asks for access, avoiding a direct demand for a finding of violations.

In the meantime, Sherrill continues to claim that local police are present to protect protesters from the ICE violence and repeats these claims about conditions at the facility.

DHS has continued to rebut claims made by politicians and pundits. However, few of those facts are penetrating the coverage of the protests or changing the sweeping claims being made by elected officials.

This lawsuit could allow for a full consideration of the claims and the facts surrounding the facility.

Here is the complaint: Washington v. The GEO Group

Tyler Durden Wed, 06/03/2026 - 17:40

India Throws Open The Bond Gates: Modi Slashes Foreign Investor Taxes In Scramble To Halt Rupee Collapse

Having spent the better part of a decade assuring the world that the Indian growth miracle was self-sustaining, structurally sound, and impervious to the “fragile five” indignities of yesteryear, New Delhi has quietly arrived at the only conclusion that ever follows a currency in freefall: print incentives, slash taxes, and beg foreigners to please, please come back.

According to Bloomberg, India is poised to announce a suite of measures to lure foreign capital - reducing taxes and removing ownership caps on certain bonds - possibly as soon as this week. The cabinet is expected to consider a “significant cut” in the taxes global funds pay on Indian bonds, with officials reportedly weighing whether to eliminate the 20% levy on bond interest income entirely, or shave it down to what the people familiar described as “a bare minimum.” Translation: foreigners weren’t biting, and somebody in the Finance Ministry finally noticed.

Separately, the Reserve Bank of India is likely to designate some long-tenor sovereign notes as “fully accessible,” allowing overseas investors to load up without limits. Readers will recall that the last tweak to this so-called Fully Accessible Route (FAR) came in 2024, when the RBI removed 14- and 30-year bonds from the list. So to recap the master plan: pull the long bonds out in 2024, watch the currency crater, then shove them back in 2026 and call it reform. Smart. 

Meanwhile, the rupee printed an all-time low of 96.9650 on May 20, capping a year in which it became the second-worst-performing currency in Asia, down more than 6% against the dollar. This is the same currency that the consensus crowd spent 2024 lauding as “among the least volatile in emerging markets,” back when foreign funds were piling into FAR bonds ahead of the JPMorgan index inclusion to the tune of nearly $10 billion. As we noted at the time, that “stability” was the entire allure... but stability built on hot money flows has a nasty habit of evaporating precisely when you need it.

It evaporated. The official list of culprits reads like a greatest-hits compilation of things that were supposedly “priced in”: US trade tariffs, record foreign fund outflows, and an oil shock courtesy of the Iran war that detonated India’s import bill. Modi himself was reduced to publicly imploring citizens to conserve foreign exchange - a phrase that should send a chill down the spine of anyone who remembers 2013, when New Delhi slapped capital controls on its own residents and restricted gold imports as the rupee buckled. Back then, those measures “raised concerns of outright capital controls” that would further undermine the confidence of foreign investors. History doesn’t repeat, but it sure does rhyme, in Hindi.

The rupee has since clawed back from the 96.97 abyss to close at 95.71 per dollar, helped by the central bank “stepping up support” (read: torching reserves) and oil easing on renewed US-Iran peace overtures (read: rapid strategic reserve drain). The 10-year yield ticked up a single basis point to 7.02%. Markets, naturally, are treating the prospect of tax-cut-fueled inflows as salvation - the same way they treated index inclusion as salvation, right before the biggest bond selloff in a year hit the moment the currency wobbled.

The government is also expected to notify a plan permitting “persons resident outside India” - PROIs, because just like in the West, every desperate measure needs a cheerful acronym - to buy shares in listed Indian companies via the portfolio investment scheme. More doors, more access, more pleading.

The deeper irony is the one nobody in New Delhi will say out loud: a country that genuinely believed in its own growth story wouldn’t need to bribe foreigners with tax exemptions to hold its paper. You cut taxes on bond interest when the organic bid has gone missing and the marginal buyer has to be paid to show up. 

We’ve seen this movie before: in 2013, in 2024, and now again in 2026. The rupee makes a record low, the foreigners head for the exits, the central bank empties the tank defending the line, and then the politburo “discovers” the virtues of liberalization at exactly the moment of maximum weakness. Reform by panic. As always, the gates open widest right when the people inside are most eager to leave.

Tyler Durden Wed, 06/03/2026 - 17:20

California's 'Wealth' Tax Is Coming For Everyone

Authored by Edward Ring via American Greatness,

If you own property in California, you're not safe. A new ballot measure will empower the state to confiscate a percentage of the assets of any resident, even though its initial provisions don't communicate that intent. California's "One-Time Wealth Tax for State-Funded Healthcare, Education, and Food Assistance Programs Initiative," which has already qualified for the November ballot, is even worse than it appears.

It's not as if appearances aren't bad enough. The explicit intent of the initiative already chased at least six billionaires out of the state in 2025. Moved to Florida are Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin, along with PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel. Nevada is now home to billionaire Don Hankey, and Texas has welcomed former Uber CEO Travis Kalanick. Famed director Steven Spielberg has moved to New York, apparently concluding even that deep blue state is a safer bet than California. Just the departure of these six men has lowered the potential take from the wealth tax by an estimated $27 billion.

A Hoover Institution study claims that another 20 California billionaires have already made departure plans and will leave immediately if the initiative is approved by voters. One of the initiative's many diabolical provisions is that it will apply retroactively to anyone living in the state after January 1, 2026, but unlike the six who got out in 2025, this next tranche of would-be exiles have been advised by their attorneys that the initiative's retroactivity will not survive a constitutional challenge.

Other details of this initiative are likely to survive court challenges, and they reveal a stunning level of aggression toward wealth. If you live in California, and this bill is approved by voters, you will have to pay a "one-time" tax of 5 percent of your "covered assets" valued over $1 billion. "Covered assets" include unrealized gains in the value of stock owned by employees of private companies. It is unlikely the framers of this initiative didn't understand the implications of this provision. Valuations of private companies are subjective, volatile, and illiquid. An employee with stock options valued at a few billion in the last private equity round could be assessed tens of millions of dollars in wealth tax on money they don't actually have access to, based on a value that could plummet at any moment.

It gets worse. The language of the wealth act provides for what amounts to unrestricted escalation of its reach, something that will surely become necessary when high earners are driven away, taking their taxable assets with them. Built into the 2026 Billionaire Tax Act is the right of the state legislature to amend its provisions with a two-thirds vote. That would include lowering the $1 billion threshold, replacing "one-time" with an annual assessment, and eliminating the exemptions currently present for real estate and retirement accounts. The wording of this initiative is purposely designed to give the state legislature the authority to override the property tax protections afforded by Proposition 13, passed by voters in 1978 and one of the only obstacles left that prevents the state from stripping the state's middle class of assets they've earned and stewarded over generations.

It is ridiculous to think California's state legislature cannot muster a two-thirds vote, anytime they wish, in order to extend the reach of the "Billionaire Tax Act" down to "millionaires," which, in California, is almost anyone who has owned their own home for more than a decade. In both houses of California's state legislature, 75 percent of the seats are held by Democrats. The overwhelming percentage of Democrats in California, and, for that matter, a sizable portion of the state's dwindling contingent of Republicans, are controlled by the state's powerful public sector unions. And more than anything else, these unions have one guiding principle: grow government, because bigger government means more membership, and more membership means more dues revenue. That's the reason that the top 10, if not the top 50, largest contributors to winning campaigns for seats in the state legislature are all public sector unions.

To grow support for more government, you must grow dependency on government, and to that end, California's state legislature has engineered a perfect storm. Every decade, more regulations buried small emerging competitive businesses, allowing the biggest and most politically compliant businesses to gain captive markets. And in complying with the state's overregulation, lacking competition, these politically favored businesses passed the increased costs of regulatory compliance on to their customers. Voila, California's energy, water, transportation, higher education, housing, and all government services became increasingly unaffordable. And as households, by the millions, could no longer afford to survive economically, government aid stepped in to fill the gap.

The numbers support this assessment. Between 2010 and 2025, when the state's total population only increased incrementally by about 1.5 million people, the number of participants in California's taxpayer-funded food aid benefits soared from 3.7 million to 5.5 million, and the state's Medi-Cal enrollment exploded from 7 million to 15 million, over one-third of the population.

Everything California's state government has done over the past 15 years has exploded commensurately. The state General Fund in 2010 was $87 billion. In 2025 it was $228 billion. Even adjusting for inflation, spending more than doubled when the total population barely budged. And what of this population?

Over the period from 2010 to 2025, nearly 10 million people moved from California to other states. The people moving into California and the people choosing to remain in California are increasingly characterized as either high-income residents who can withstand the high cost of living or low-income residents who depend on government assistance. California's Gini Coefficient, at 0.49, puts it in a virtual tie with New York and Connecticut as the states with the worst income inequality in the nation. To claim this is the fault of billionaires is a convenient lie, promulgated by the very politicians whose own policies were the true cause.

It ought to be clear to anyone who has spent any time in sunny California, a place blessed with literally every scenic amenity imaginable from alpine peaks to sandy beaches, the best wine on earth and spectacular coastal cities, that the only thing that could possibly induce them to not want to live here permanently would be an overtly hostile government. And that's exactly what has happened. Every major challenge California faces is the product of a government that has decided to serve itself instead of the people.

The model of "democracy" that California has perfected can be summed up in one sentence: overregulate an economy to make life unaffordable without government handouts, then win elections by promising more government handouts to people who can't live without them. It is unsustainable, because as the old cliche goes, pretty soon you run out of other people's money. The exodus of California's wealthiest residents is the latest iteration of this doom loop.

Far removed from idealistic fantasies sold to voters, this is the reality of progressive politics in California. Given half a chance, it will be exported to the rest of the nation.

Tyler Durden Wed, 06/03/2026 - 17:00

Gold Dethrones The King: ECB Confirms Barbarous Relic Has Overtaken Treasuries As Top Global Reserve Asset

In what can only be described as the latest humiliating blow to the crumbling Pax Americana, gold has officially overtaken US government bonds as the world's top reserve asset.

The FT reports that, according to a fresh report from the European Central Bank released Tuesday, bullion now accounts for 27% of global central bank reserves at the end of 2025 - up sharply from 20% the prior year.

US Treasuries, once the untouchable king of the reserve world, have been knocked down to 22% from 25%. The euro's share remained flat at 15%.

This isn't some organic portfolio rebalancing. It's a full-scale de-dollarization revolt years in the making, turbocharged by Washington's own weaponization of the dollar.

“Geopolitical tensions continue to drive strong central bank demand for gold,” wrote ECB President Christine Lagarde in the report - in the driest possible bureaucrat speak while watching the system she helped build slowly circle the drain.

Central banks are now sitting on more than 36,000 tonnes of gold — nearly matching the peak hoarding levels seen during the final days of the Bretton Woods system (38,000 tonnes). You know, back when money was still somewhat tethered to reality.

The message from the periphery is crystal clear: trust in the US dollar as the ultimate reserve currency is eroding fast.

The catalyst? The same one we have been screaming about for years - the reckless weaponization of SWIFT and dollar reserves.

After Washington froze Russia's FX reserves following the 2022 Ukraine invasion, every finance minister from Brasília to Beijing got the memo: Never let them do this to us.

The numbers tell the story of quiet desperation.

China, Poland, Turkey, and India have been the most aggressive gold stackers since 2022.

Even Tether, the stablecoin giant, became the single largest buyer in 2025, slurping up over 100 tonnes.

Because nothing says "we believe in the system" like parking your balance sheet in physical gold while issuing dollar-pegged liabilities.

Of course, there are cracks in the narrative.

Turkey - after aggressively buying 220 tonnes post-2022 - executed one of the largest reserve drawdowns in recent memory in early 2026, selling or lending out 130 tonnes amid the fallout from the Iran war.

Even gold bugs sometimes need liquidity when things get spicy.

Still, the broader trend is unmistakable.

While dollar-denominated assets still make up 42% of reserves overall, the trajectory is brutally obvious to anyone not drinking the mainstream financial media Kool-Aid.

Gold's surge wasn't just about central bank buying (which slowed modestly to 850 tonnes in 2025 after multiple 1,000+ tonne years). It was supercharged by the metal's explosive rally, smashing through $5,500 per ounce earlier this year.

Meanwhile, the ECB couldn't resist patting itself on the back, noting the euro's "gradual but steady" gains in international usage, with euro-denominated debt issuance hitting record highs and massive capital inflows into euro assets.

Translation: At least someone still wants our funny money... for now.

The bond market's loss is gold's gain - and history suggests this kind of shift rarely ends with a whimper. When central banks themselves start treating Treasuries like a fading brand and gold like the ultimate insurance policy, the writing is on the wall for the dollar's exorbitant privilege.

The only question left is how much longer the music can keep playing.

Tyler Durden Wed, 06/03/2026 - 16:40

Never Let Politicians Decide What Is True

Authored by J.B. Shurk via American Thinker,

We are living through an age that has abandoned the dedicated pursuit of truth. Our politicians and news personalities talk about "the narrative." Our academies teach young minds to accept "expert opinion." Our philosophers argue that truth is "subjective." Social theorists argue that truth is an "illusion" that powerful people use to control others.

Whenever I hear Democrat Senator Cory Booker all riled up on television, he's talking about "her truth," "his truth," or even "their truth" - as if a hundred conflicting descriptions of the same event could all be truthful.

During Justice Kavanaugh's confirmation hearings, Democrats called Dr. Christine Blasey Ford to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Ford claimed that Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her in 1982 when both were in high school. Kavanaugh vehemently denied the allegation and argued that many parts of Ford's story didn't add up. When Kavanaugh told the senators that the whole thing was a political spectacle being used as a weapon to derail his confirmation, Senator Booker shouted, "Are you calling her some kind of political operative?" Kavanaugh calmly pointed out, "The witnesses who were there [the party at which Blasey Ford claimed the alleged assault occurred] say it didn't happen." Kavanaugh then stated that, although Blasey Ford's allegations were false and harmful, his "family has no ill will toward her."

This is how Booker responded to Justice Kavanaugh's total denial of the allegation against him: "She came forward. She sat here. She told her truth." Her truth. Not the truth. The "truth" that was most likely to help Democrats "Bork" Kavanaugh's nomination - just as then-Senator Joe Biden and fellow Democrats tried to do during Justice Clarence Thomas's confirmation hearings back in '91 when they brought in a witness who claimed that Thomas had made "unwelcome sexual comments" when the two worked together, a charge Thomas similarly and furiously denied.

What was revealing about Booker's made-for-TV moment was his disregard for whether Kavanaugh had actually done anything untoward forty years earlier in his life. He didn't care. The lack of any evidence that could credibly support Blasey Ford's allegation didn't matter. Nor did it matter that Kavanaugh flatly denied the allegation. For Booker, the only "fact" that mattered was that Blasey Ford was willing to testify to something that might sink Kavanaugh's nomination. "Her truth," even if false, made it compelling.

Booker's flippant disregard for the truth was reminiscent of President Bill Clinton's rationalization to a grand jury that he never lied about his affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky when he told his staff, "There's nothing going on between us," and Jim Lehrer of PBS, "There is no improper relationship." As everyone who recalls Lewinsky's stained blue dress knows, Clinton's statements were lies. But when Clinton testified before members of a grand jury, this was his truth:

"It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If the - if he - if 'is' means is and never has been, that is not - that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement.…Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said 'no.' And it would have been completely true."

At that moment, President Clinton proved to Americans that he had no interest in truth. He did not care if he lied. He cared only whether the American people might catch him in a lie. Whether Clinton had "plausible deniability" mattered. Whether he could confuse enough jurors over the meaning of "is" mattered. But the truth? Well, the truth is for rubes and suckers. Clinton's dissembling and Booker's disregard for what actually happened in 1982 are symptoms of the same disease: our dishonest age's abandonment of - and even hostility toward - what is true.

Politicians lie. That's hardly breaking news. What is newsworthy, though, is that our society does not even pretend to pursue truth anymore.

During COVID, we were forced to follow government mandates that made absolutely no sense. Why was it safe for Walmart to remain open when small businesses were forced to close? How could paper masks, arrows painted on the floor, plexiglass walls, or six feet of space save us from microorganisms that don't care about such things? Why should schools be closed when the virus posed the least threat to young people? Why should healthy people who had already acquired natural immunity be forced to take an experimental injection? The public was right to ask so many valid questions. Yet our government-run health organizations responded with juvenile insouciance: We're working at the speed of science! That was the "scientific" equivalent of, "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is."

We're fifteen years into this gender-bender madness during which "experts" (including too many with M.D.s) claim that biological sex is not real and that what we perceive as male or female is nothing more than a self-imposed social construct. People who have refused to play this delusional game have been fired from jobs. People looking for jobs tell obvious lies.

During Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's confirmation hearings, Republican Senator Marsha Blackburn asked, "Can you provide a definition for the word 'woman'?" The newest member of the Supreme Court replied, "No, I can't." "You can't?" Blackburn asked incredulously. The jurist who holds one of the most powerful offices in the United States claimed, "Not in this context. I'm not a biologist." This is where we are now. A judge with two Harvard degrees can't tell the American people whether she is actually a woman.

A few days ago, reporter and columnist John Stossel noted that twenty years have passed since former Vice President Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth was released in theaters. Along with a short five-minute video that includes research scientists from the Heartland Institute debunking the pseudoscience behind "climate change" fearmongering, Stossel summed up Gore's lies thusly: "NONE of his scary predictions have come true. Mt. Kilimanjaro still has snow and Glacier National Park still has glaciers." Yet included in that short video is a litany of celebrity "experts" and Democrat politicians all parroting the same lie: We have only twelve years left to live.

The "global warming" liars spent the last twenty years scaring children all over the world by telling them that they would die before being old enough to drive. Now some of those scared kids have children of their own, and the "climate change" con is still going. Prominent Democrats such as Cory Booker, Amy Klobuchar, and Richard Blumenthal have even supported legislation that would prohibit funds to federal agencies that "challenge the scientific consensus on climate change." In other words, Democrat politicians wish to outlaw the Scientific Method.

Our society does not doggedly pursue truth. It pursues ideological compliance.

Truth does not require President Joe Biden's Disinformation Governance Board to arbitrate reality for the public. Science is never "settled," as President Barack Obama claimed in his 2014 State of the Union Address. People without PhDs are quite capable of defining a "woman" and deciding for themselves whether to wear paper masks. To pretend otherwise is just another lie.

Here's the real problem, though: When our politicians, scientists, educators, and philosophers spread the lie that there is no objective truth, they transform our existence into gooey meaninglessness. Because if everything is "true," then nothing is true. And if nothing is true, then politicians will decide what is "true" for us.

Pursuing truth does not mean that we ever obtain it. It is the vigilant pursuit of truth, though, that gives us sufficient wisdom to recognize the lies and liars among us. In an age when liars rule, question everything.

Tyler Durden Wed, 06/03/2026 - 16:20

IBM Announces Five-Year, $10BN Quantum Investment

IBM is set to invest more than $10 billion in quantum computing over the next five years.

According to the company, the investment will cover R&D, capex, manufacturing scaling, ecosystem partnerships, and M&A; areas that IBM says will help accelerate its quantum roadmap beyond 2029, when it expects to deliver the world's first large-scale, fault-tolerant quantum computer.

The announcement comes two weeks after the US government signed letters of intent with nine quantum computing companies, including IBM. That agreement will see IBM receive $1bn from the Department of Commerce, the largest funding agreement of the nine, to establish a new superconducting quantum foundry subsidiary dubbed Anderon.

At the time, IBM said Anderon would be the first pure-play quantum foundry in the US, adding that the company would match the $1bn from the Department of Commerce to fund the initiative. The subsidiary will be headquartered in Albany, New York, and will operate as a standalone company, manufacturing 300mm quantum wafers.

"The quantum era is no longer ahead of us, it has started. Our clients, partners, and users around the world are tapping into IBM quantum computers to do work that was impossible a few years ago," said Arvind Krishna, chairman and CEO, IBM. "The pace of discovery with quantum computers is accelerating rapidly, and this investment powers our ability to deliver the next generation of quantum hardware, software, and manufacturing."

IBM has been at the forefront of the development of quantum processors and, in February 2025, claimed to have booked $1bn in quantum business between Q1 2017 and Q4 2024. In November of that same year, IBM claimed it would achieve quantum advantage by the end of 2026 and is on target to develop a fault-tolerant quantum computer by 2029.

In April of this year, it was reported that IBM was planning to expand its quantum campus in Poughkeepsie, New York. The company has filed to develop a 511,000 sq ft (47,475 sqm) quantum computing facility at its existing campus and will demolish two buildings to establish the new center, which will be used to manufacture and assemble its next-generation Starling quantum systems.

 

Tyler Durden Wed, 06/03/2026 - 15:45

Uber Introduces $1,500 Monthly Cap On AI Coding Tools After Budget Blowout

Uber has set a $1,500 monthly cap on employee spending for specific AI coding tools after the company exhausted its entire 2026 budget for those tools in the first four months of the year.

The limits apply to agentic coding platforms such as Anthropic’s Claude Code and Cursor, according to Stocktwits. Prior to the caps, some engineers were generating monthly bills between $500 and $2,000 in token consumption as adoption of the tools surged following their rollout in late 2025.

In April, Uber CTO Praveen Neppalli Naga went on the record saying the company had burned through its entire 2026 Claude Code budget in four months. Roughly 5,000 engineers, monthly usage rates between 84 and 95%, per-engineer bills ranging from $150 to $2,000. Neppalli reportedly torched $1,200 in tokens during a two-hour internal demo. Macdonald would later describe his reaction to learning the number as a "head-exploding moment."

President and COO Andrew Macdonald has been open about the challenge - noting that while AI tools are seeing strong adoption, the direct connection between higher token spend and the delivery of useful new features for customers remains unclear.

A company spokesperson said the new framework is intended to “responsibly encourage agentic AI adoption and experimentation at scale” while keeping costs under control. The restrictions do not apply to all AI tools used at Uber - only the higher-cost agentic coding software.

A Wider Corporate Reckoning on AI Costs

Uber’s move is part of a broader shift among large companies as they confront the real costs of scaling artificial intelligence. Walmart has similarly capped employee access to its internal AI assistant, Code Puppy, after usage far exceeded expectations. The retailer shifted from unlimited tokens to fixed per-employee allocations and is now emphasizing training to ensure AI is used for high-value tasks.

This is what we've been seeing with every company we work with.

Try justifying spending 100k on token spend when only 18k even makes it to a stable prod feature.

In the rush to maximize AI token spend, companies are wasting over 44% on bug fixes https://t.co/9MNOtXtk4Z pic.twitter.com/y68Ed0XwXj

— Aiswarya Sankar (@Aiswarya_Sankar) May 26, 2026

Microsoft has also scaled back internal access to Claude Code for engineers in one of its major divisions, directing staff toward its own GitHub Copilot tools amid rising costs. But then, GitHub started charging for actual use vs. a flat monthly fee.

🦔GitHub Copilot switched to token-based billing this morning and users are already out of credits. Pro+ subscribers paying $39 a month are reporting 60% of their credits gone in two hours of normal use. One user lost 20% of their allowance from a single file review with no code… pic.twitter.com/AnIewV27rE

— Hedgie (@HedgieMarkets) June 1, 2026

Across industries, companies are discovering that agentic AI tools can deliver meaningful productivity gains but often consume tokens at rates that quickly outpace traditional budgeting models. Many organizations initially rolled out these tools with minimal guardrails. The result has been budget overruns and increased scrutiny from finance teams and boards over return on investment.

Rather than abandoning AI, most companies are responding by adding governance: usage dashboards, spending caps, approval workflows, and clearer prioritization of high-value use cases. The goal is to make AI adoption sustainable rather than uncontrolled.

As model efficiency improves and costs per token continue to decline, the economics of AI are expected to become more favorable. For now, the most disciplined organizations are treating AI spending with the same rigor applied to other major technology investments - balancing rapid experimentation with financial accountability.

Tyler Durden Wed, 06/03/2026 - 15:30

Latest Fed Beige Book Underscores "K-Shaped" Split Of US Economy

Economic activity increased at a "slight to moderate" pace for ten of the twelve Federal Reserve Districts, while one District reported a slight decline and one reported no change, according to the latest Fed Beige Book.

The just released Beige Book - prepared at the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City based on information collected on or before May 27, 2026, and is the second one to capture the effect of the war on the US economy - found that consumer spending remained mixed across districts and increasingly bifurcated across income groups amid affordability pressures, the latest confirmation of the K-shaped economy.

In keeping with an increasingly fractured economy, the anecdotes highlighted moments of weakness that indicated far more weakness that the headline assessment indicated, to wit:

• higher-income households remained resilient and less sensitive to price increase, while middle-income households were described as “squeezing more life out of every dollar before deciding to spend it,” and low-income consumers showed greater financial strain. Said strain led to reports of increased credit card usage, fewer retail visits, and stronger demand for necessities.
• Auto dealers reported softer new vehicle demand tied to affordability and fuel costs, alongside substitution toward used and hybrid vehicles.
• By contrast, manufacturing activity increased at a modest to strong pace for nine of the Districts and only one noted a slight decline from the previous period.
• Banking conditions were stable across most Districts; however, residential mortgages, consumer, and agricultural loan delinquencies were noted as rising in several of the Districts.
• Agriculture conditions were unchanged or declined for most of the Districts, with cost pressures intensifying from fuel and fertilizer spikes.
• Energy activity increased in two of the markets, but Districts reported that the outlook remains highly uncertain leading producers to hold off on materially expanding activity.
• More broadly, business outlooks for the next six months were reported to have little change in anticipated growth, as elevated uncertainty and signs of weakening consumer spending weighed on sentiment.

In terms of labor markets, the Beige Book said the following: 

• Employment showed little to no change across eleven Districts, while one District experienced modest growth.
• Manufacturing hiring was the strongest sector in several Districts, supported by defense-related activity and rising data center demand.
• Wage growth generally remained modest to moderate and largely in line with inflation. That said, Districts reported more frequent wage adjustments and cost-of-living increases to manage increasing fuel and other household cost pressures.
• Most Districts described a low-hire, low-fire environment, with workers increasingly reluctant to change jobs because of economic uncertainty.
• Hiring remained selective and primarily focused on critical roles or attrition replacement.
• Professional services occupations had mixed demand conditions, partly reflecting shifts in technological and operational changes.

As for prices, they "increased at a moderate to strong pace" overall, with most Districts reporting higher inflation than the previous report.

• Districts noted that energy-related costs tied to the conflict in the Middle East were the primary driver of inflationary pressures, with spillovers into shipping, packaging, groceries, and fertilizer.
• Non-labor input costs continued to rise faster than selling prices, contributing to broader concerns about margin compression.
• The ability to pass on higher costs remained mixed across sectors, particularly among consumer-facing firms.
• Consumer uncertainty and concerns about fuel prices impacting households were noted by several Districts.
• Several regions highlighted inflation mitigation strategies of firms that ranged from supply-chain optimization, product adjustments, reduced offerings, and temporarily absorbing higher costs to preserve customer demand.

Finally, here are the main highlights by Fed districts

• Boston: Economic activity grew slightly overall. Employment was unchanged, but hiring activity picked up in places, and wages showed slight gains. Cost pressures linked to the Middle East conflict remained elevated, although output prices rose only slightly overall. Consumer spending edged higher, despite the strain on household budgets from elevated gas prices. The outlook was mixed.
• New York: Regional economic activity increased slightly after a sustained period of weakness. Manufacturing activity grew strongly, consumer spending increased moderately, and housing activity picked up. Employment edged up, and wage growth eased somewhat but remained modest. Selling price increases rose to the high end of the moderate range, and input prices rose strongly, driven by rising energy costs. Businesses generally expected modest improvement.
• Philadelphia: Business activity declined slightly in the current period, down from a slight increase in the last period. Employment declined somewhat, as manufacturers and nonmanufacturers reported declines in jobs overall. Wage inflation held steady at a modest pace, and firm price inflation was moderate. Expectations for future growth rose at a strong pace for manufacturers but remained below the long-run average for nonmanufacturers.
• Cleveland: Fourth District business activity increased moderately, with similar growth anticipated in the months ahead. Manufacturing demand rose robustly, while retailers faced dampened demand from higher fuel prices. Home sales continued to improve, and data center buildouts drove commercial construction demand. Employment increased modestly. While wage pressures remained moderate, increases in nonlabor costs and selling prices were robust.
• Richmond: The regional economy continued to grow modestly this cycle. Modest growth was reported for consumer spending, financial services, and nonfinancial business services. Manufacturing activity increased moderately amid continued concerns about economic stability. Employment was unchanged, on balance, and wage growth was modest. Price growth remained in a moderate range despite many comments about increased input costs.
• Atlanta: Economic activity grew at a modest pace. Employment levels were flat and wages rose slowly. Prices and costs rose at a moderate pace. While retail sales grew modestly, travel activity slowed. Commercial and residential real estate were flat to down. Transportation and manufacturing activity expanded modestly. Energy demand rose moderately.
• Chicago: Economic activity in the Seventh District increased slightly over the reporting period. Manufacturing demand rose moderately; consumer spending, employment, and construction and real estate activity increased slightly; business spending was flat on balance; and nonbusiness contacts saw no change in economic activity. Prices rose rapidly, wages were up modestly, and financial conditions tightened slightly. Farm income expectations for 2026 were unchanged.
• St. Louis: Economic activity has slightly increased. Employment was unchanged and wage growth remained moderate. Prices have risen at a robust pace due to widespread higher nonlabor and energy costs. The outlook has slightly deteriorated, with contacts citing ongoing uncertainty, supply chain disruptions, and rising fuel costs linked to the conflict in the Middle East.
• Minneapolis: The District expanded modestly. Prices increased sharply and input pressures were especially high. Employment grew slightly and wage growth was modest to moderate. Services, manufacturing, and construction activity grew. Oil and gas contacts reported little change in activity or plans despite oil price shocks.
• Kansas City: Economic activity in the Tenth District increased slightly, though consumer-facing firms continued to report softer demand and margin compression. Restaurants noted middle-income households have become increasingly cautious with discretionary spending. Firms also reported rising input costs, with non-energy expenses exerting the greatest upward pressure.
• Dallas: Economic activity in the Eleventh District rose modestly. Growth resumed in the service sector and picked up pace in manufacturing and banking. Retail sales weakened, energy activity ticked up, and the real estate sector was mixed. Employment was largely flat. Outlooks were tepid amid heightened uncertainty stemming from the Middle East conflict and sharply higher transportation costs.
• San Francisco: Economic activity was stable. Employment levels were unchanged on net. Prices rose moderately, and wages grew slightly. Retail sales were roughly flat. Manufacturing activity improved somewhat, while conditions in agriculture and residential real estate weakened slightly. Activity in consumer and business services, commercial real estate, and finance was steady.

Tyler Durden Wed, 06/03/2026 - 14:55

Dispersion And Correlation Are Screaming Overbought, Downside Hedging Is Cheap

Submitted by SpotGamma

CBOE’s Dispersion Index (DSPX) is at levels only seen during Covid and the April ’25 tariff crash, while Correlation (COR1M) is near all-time lows. This divergence signals extreme positioning risk driven by the AI stock chase, and makes SPY downside hedges historically cheap.

Traders have been chasing AI related names in such heavy-handed fashion that it has now created positioning risk for the stock market.

Encapsulating this view are two popular CBOE options indexes: Dispersion (DSPX) and Correlation (COR1M).

What Are Dispersion DSPX & Correlation COR1M?

DSPX compares the options prices (IV) of the top US stocks vs SPX IV, and measures how different they are from each other. High dispersion means traders are assigning vastly different options prices to individual names. Today, we have traders frothing to chase upside in MU, SNDK, and the like, while scorning other sectors.

COR1M measures the direction of options prices for top US stocks vs the SPX. During periods of calm we generally see traders bit up call options, and sell SPX options, which creates low correlation. Conversely, when there is a lot of fear in the stock market, correlation spikes as traders sell all stocks and buy SPX options – typically puts.

Currently DSPX (blue) is at highs only seen since the Covid crash after just passing highs from the April 2025 Tariff drama. Meanwhile, COR1M (red), is nearing it’s lowest reading ever.

This gives us a massive never-before-seen divergence (black arrows) between spiking options prices (high dispersion) and only certain stocks surging higher (low correlation).

The previous highs in DSPX came during massive risk-off periods! Why? Because in both 2020 and in 2025 traders were pricing in vastly different risk due to traumatic events: in Covid cruise lines were crashing massively, whereas healthcare stocks were bid. During April ’25 it was about parsing tariff winners and losers. These heavy “winners and losers” environment created a lot of dispersion in options prices.

Today the massive dispersion is driven by the chase in AI stocks, which is now at extremes.

Notice, too, how correlation (red) spiked during those previous events as traders sold stocks sharply lower. In other words: all stocks crashed in Covid/Tariffs (i.e. high correlation), just some stocks crashed harder (high dispersion).

However correlation is at lows not seen since July of 2024, with July ’24 being the all-time low. This comes as traders are very complacent about downside risk – despite the Iran war situation.

How Do Options Prices Differ Across Stocks?

An under the hood view of this dynamic is shown with SpotGamma’s Compass tool. If a stocks call options are much more expensive than their calls, the plot lands toward the right of this chart (X axis). As traders anticipate more stock movement (IV), the plot lands higher on this chart (Y axis).

Compare SMH (yellow arrow), which is at the top right of this chart. Traders are betting that this stock is essentially going to contine crashing higher.

The tech-heavy QQQ is also in a showing a heavily bullish positioning, which traders betting that upside hot streaks continue. The big single stock constituents have effectively “infected” the Nasdaq Index with uber-bullish views.

The SPY, however, has been shifting away from call leaning positions, to put positions. However, the overall IV remains low, showing traders have simply been backing off from call positions vs strongly betting on downside.

SPX QQQ SMH Skew

The extreme readings here suggest options positioning could drive a stock volatility event, as extreme call positioning unwinds. 

This difference (or dispersion) in options prices here creates many different trade setups, with different risk-rewards for traders:

SPY put options may be relatively much cheaper that puts in SMH, or QQQ. We view these as low risk, with potentially high reward.

More dramatically, selling calls in SMH or QQQ could offer fantastic rewards, but also bring major risks if the hot upside continues.

Parsing what type of downside position that may be right for you involves mapping out:

1. How likely are the odds of a market correction
2. The potential risk vs reward of various downside trade structures

Knowing these two elements sets up how you might select and position for a potential downside move.

Join our upcoming event on June 9th: Trade Like the House, where we will be combing positional analysis with probabilities, to gain structural edge with your trading.

Tyler Durden Wed, 06/03/2026 - 14:20

New York Democrats Move To Redraw Congressional Maps

Authored by Chase Smith via The Epoch Times,

New York Democrats are moving to give state lawmakers the power to redraw the state’s congressional maps, entering the national fight over control of the U.S. House.

The proposed constitutional amendment would allow lawmakers to draw district lines themselves and redraw them mid-decade. It had not been formally filed as of Tuesday morning, but The Epoch Times has reviewed a memo describing the proposed changes.

The proposed amendment would change New York’s redistricting system in several ways.

According to the memo, state lawmakers could draw the maps themselves if the state’s independent redistricting commission fails to agree on a plan, and could approve maps with a simple majority vote rather than the larger vote the constitution now requires.

Court fights over the maps would go back to the Legislature, rather than to a court-appointed expert known as a special master.

And lawmakers could redraw congressional districts between the once-a-decade census counts.

The memo also lists new rules for how maps must be drawn. They would still bar maps that weaken the voting power of racial or language minorities and would still require districts to be equal in population and connected. The list does not include the constitution’s current ban on drawing districts “for the purpose of favoring or disfavoring incumbents or other particular candidates or political parties.”

New York voters created the independent commission in 2014, approving a constitutional amendment meant to take map-drawing out of politicians’ hands. The system encountered issues the last time it was used.

After the commission deadlocked, Democrats in the Legislature drew their own maps. In 2022, the state’s highest court threw them out, ruling they were an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander, and a special master drew the lines instead.

Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins defended the plan in an emailed statement to The Epoch Times on Tuesday, June 2.

“New York cannot afford to stand still,” she said. “We cannot ignore the reality that Republicans have repeatedly sought to undermine democracy through various attempts to gain political advantage. At a time when democracy is under attack across the country, we have a responsibility to protect all voters including the minority communities and ensure that every New Yorker continues to have a voice. This legislation remains firmly rooted in the democratic process, giving New Yorkers themselves the final say at the ballot box.”

New York Sen. Andrea Stewart-Cousins speaks during an event at the Rockefeller Foundation on in New York City on Feb. 20, 2018. Dia Dipasupil/Getty Images

She added, “We believe these changes will ensure that our state has the tools necessary to preserve a level playing field in the face of Republican-led efforts to tilt maps and weaken democratic participation—without compromising the integrity of the Independent Redistricting Commission.”

The push follows a wave of mid-decade redistricting that began in Texas last summer, when Republicans moved to redraw their congressional map at President Donald Trump’s urging. California Democrats responded with their own redraw. Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Virginia, Florida, and Tennessee have since taken up mid-decade efforts, with other states discussing the matter as well.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) has made the state’s congressional lines part of his strategy to win back the House. He tapped Rep. Joe Morelle (D-N.Y.) to coordinate with state officials, and Morelle met with Gov. Kathy Hochul and legislative leaders in Albany on May 5.

The change would not happen quickly. A constitutional amendment in New York must pass the Legislature twice, this year and again after the 2026 elections, and then win approval from voters. The earliest it could affect any maps is the 2028 election. The legislative session ends June 4.

Republicans oppose the plan. In a May 31 statement to The Epoch Times, Assembly Minority Leader Ed Ra, a Republican, called any plan to redraw maps mid-decade or change the commission “a shameful attempt to nullify the will of the voters.”

At a June 1 news conference as those reports continued to surface, Ra said Democrats started the fight in New York well ahead of Texas’s move last year.

“It was started by New York State Democrats,” he said, referring to previous maps drawn by New York Democrats. He noted that voters rejected a similar measure in 2021.

Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.) speaks to reporters at Rockland Community at Rockland Community College in Suffern, N.Y., on May 22, 2026. Samira Bouaou/The Epoch Times

Rep. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.) said New York Democrats drew their own maps in 2022 to protect their House majority.

“They just went and drew their own maps and totally disregarded the Constitution,” he said at the press conference.

Assemblyman Matt Slater, the top Republican on the Assembly Elections Committee, said the current system is functioning correctly.

“The system is working,” he said on June 1, adding New York now has “some of the most competitive congressional districts anywhere in the country.”

Sen. Mark Walczyk, the top Republican on the Senate Elections Committee, said voters were clear in 2014.

“We want an independent redistricting commission,” he said.

Tyler Durden Wed, 06/03/2026 - 14:05

SDNY Prosecutors Looking At Valuation Discrepancies In Private Credit Market

In a move that is long overdue, Jay Clayton, the US attorney for the Southern District of New York, said his office is looking at possible valuation discrepancies in the private credit marketplace. 

Wall Street’s top prosecutor addressed the issue Wednesday while speaking at the Bloomberg Global Credit Forum in New York.

Clayton said the difference between the price at which assets are marked on one balance sheet versus others was at the heart of blowups at First Brands Group, Tricolor Holdings and 777 Partners.

“Where you look is when you have a market where there’s a bunch of participants and a large portion of them have it marked at say 75 and one or two have it marked at 95,” Clayton said.

“That’s a place where you say, okay, I need to ask some questions about the folks who are marking it at 95, particularly if they’re making fees off it,” he added. “To be clear, I’m asking my people to look at that question across the marketplace.”

An example of how furiously marks can move - lower - in private credit, back in March, we reported that Blackrock slashed the value of one of its private loans from par to 0 in just months, Infinite Commerce Holdings, sparking a selloff in the shares as the market was stunned by how quickly a loan from the world's most iconic asset manager can go from par to 0 in just days.

At the same time, however, Clayton warned against “pearl-clutching” about private credit and suggested that it had been a boon to the US economy. He said he didn’t currently see a “transmission mechanism” by which issues in the private credit sector could affect the broader economy.

Clayton had previously expressed concern about how Wall Street firms value private assets. The Justice Department’s Manhattan outpost in recent months has been seeking information about BlackRock TCP Capital Corp. - most likely in relation to the abovementioned loan - Bloomberg reported in May.

Clayton, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission during Trump’s first presidency, took over the Manhattan US attorney’s office after his re-election. In between those roles, he was chairman of private-markets powerhouse Apollo, which has recently been touting its push to price some $830 billion of credit assets daily in a bid to boost transparency.

Tyler Durden Wed, 06/03/2026 - 13:25

'The Pricking Is Coming': Dalio Warns AI Bubble Will Burst Like Dot-Com, But Tech Will Endure

Bridgewater Associates founder Ray Dalio appeared on Bloomberg TV today and delivered a measured yet cautionary assessment of the artificial intelligence investment frenzy. He highlighted classic bubble dynamics - sky-high valuations, rampant speculation, and "paper wealth" vastly outpacing actual cash flows - while drawing direct parallels to the 2000 dot-com era.

"All great technology changes produce bubbles," Dalio said in the Wednesday Bloomberg Television interview. "Nobody can get it exactly right. You have to either spend a ton of money to capture your market share and don't worry about whether it's too much or not, or you don't spend enough money and you lose your market share."

Dalio explained the mechanism of how such a bubble eventually bursts: "The pricking is the converting of wealth into money." He noted that today's AI-driven market is "following that kind of path, even though it is a wonderful technology."

⚠️ Ray Dalio on timing the top of an AI bubble:

The pricking is converting wealth into money because I need money, so I have to sell some of the wealth in order to get the money. pic.twitter.com/lWtT8eOHou

— LuxAlgo (@LuxAlgo) June 3, 2026 AI Will Survive - Many Companies May Not

Dalio also hit on the law of the jungle; a lot of companies simply disappear during massive technological upheaval - as competition sorts out the winners and losers - which is separate of the technology's lasting impact. In short, the underlying innovations in AI will continue transforming economies and societies, much as the internet did after its own bubble deflated.

Meanwhile, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang just touted "insane" returns for investors willing to bet on the AI boom - with chipmakers notably having been the hottest stocks on Wall Street of late - driven by demand for high-bandwidth chips used in AI data centers and taking the market to record heights.

Tyler Durden Wed, 06/03/2026 - 12:45

Snubbed By SpaceX, Jefferies Now Helping Traders Short World's Biggest IPO

Two weeks ago, when the SpaceX IPO prospectus landed, we observed, that "Goldman is lead left; and pretty much every other bank is on the cover."

Goldman is lead left; and pretty much every other bank is on the cover. They need that to sell it to retail https://t.co/9JogVIxo1i pic.twitter.com/nSnvx6tWqs

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) May 20, 2026

Yet one bank was missing: middle-market specialist (with a penchant for junk bonds and lack of due diligence on private credit deals), Jefferies.

Whether it was shunned due to prior bad blood between Elon and bank execs, or something else happened behind the scenes, we don't know but Jefferies bankers did not take it well. And now, SpaceX bears and some of Jefferies’ own bosses see the snub that as a unique opportunity to gang up against an IPO that some say could be in for a major reckoning once the stock prices.

According to Bloomberg, hedge funds that aren’t sold on Elon Musk’s rockets-to-tweets empire are hitting up Jefferies to see if it can arrange bets against SpaceX’s shares once they go public in one of the most highly anticipated initial public offerings ever.

Jefferies, which is the biggest US investment bank not named on the S-1 cover, is now uniquely situated to arrange those trades. While Wall Street firms routinely help clients take positions on all sides of a company’s shares, their lawyers can get nervous when one desk pitches a stock’s prospects to the masses while another helps clients bet against it. And that’s not to mention how Musk would react if one of the 23 banks he hired for his SpaceX’s debut helps set up big bearish trades.

Jefferies is not among them. And it is now seeking creative ways to make up for the loss in underwriter revenue. 

Banks have clamored for a piece of the IPO with a record valuation of at least $1.8 trillion. Bloomberg reported that Goldman CEO David Solomon reached out to Musk personally by sliding into his DMs on Twitter. His bank and Morgan Stanley ended up listed first on the deal (although MS was to the right of Goldman, a slap in the face of Adam Jonas who had covered TSLA for over a decade with nothing but praise), which is big enough to generate about $500 million of fees for underwriters.

And since they’re missing out on the SpaceX IPO - to the chagrin of some of the firm’s top rainmakers - Jefferies’ trading bosses are seeing a chance to mop up more business unencumbered, the Bloomberg sources said. In addition to shorting, the firm’s traders are preparing to help any investors that are allocated shares flip them in the days after SpaceX’s debut, BBG sources said.

While short sellers have struggled historically to successfully bet against Musk and his famously loyal shareholder base in the past, Bloomberg correctly notes that on Wall Street, building bridges to some of your competitors’ prized trading clients can be worth much more in the long run.

Tyler Durden Wed, 06/03/2026 - 12:25

CBS Fires '60 Minutes' Scott Pelley 'For Cause' After "Performative Display Of Hostility"

CBS News has fired "60 Minutes" correspondent Scott Pelley over a row with new executive producer Nick Bilton.

As Just The News reports, the shakeup marks the latest in a series of major changes at the network since Bari Weiss took over the network.

Her tenure has prompted internal dissent, much of which has leaked into the press.

Weiss founded the Free Press after leaving the New York Times and became head of CBS News after a buyout.

Pelley was among those critical of Weiss's decisions, including the appointment of Nick Bilton as executive producer for the show, Politico reported.

Pelley said CBS News head Bari Weiss was “murdering the show” and accused its new producer of having “slender qualifications” for the job, according to a report from HeadlineUSA.

Pelley made his accusations in an introductory meeting Monday between the newsmagazine’s staff and Nick Bilton, the new executive producer named by Weiss last week, according to a detailed report on the Status website, which said it had heard a recording of the meeting.

Weiss herself was not present, according to the report. Status specializes in media news and analysis.

Status reported that Pelley, the longtime “60 Minutes” correspondent, began grilling Bilton at the 10 a.m. meeting about the firings last week of Bilton’s predecessor, Tanya Simon, and correspondents Sharyn Alfonsi and Cecilia Vega.

Status also reported that Pelley told Bilton, a former technology journalist and filmmaker with no traditional broadcast news experience, that his qualifications for the position were “slender.”

Pelley also charged, according to Status, that Weiss herself had “no qualifications for her job,” and said the changes she had made to “CBS Evening News,” which Pelley once anchored, “have been catastrophic.”

It added that Bilton insisted that “Bari loves this institution” and “she loves ’60 Minutes'” — to which Pelley countered, “She’s murdering ‘60 minutes.’ She does not love this place. She was brought in to kill it and she’s doing exactly that.”

The New York Times, which also reported that it had listened to a recording of Monday’s meeting, noted that Pelley’s “newscaster’s baritone” was shaking during the exchange.

The newspaper also quoted an unnamed executive at the meeting as saying Weiss had been prepared to come, but “we asked her not to.”

Reports about the contentious meeting came four days after Weiss, who has become a polarizing figure in the media world since taking the reins at CBS last October, told staff in a memo that it was time for a “new approach” at the top-rated newsmagazine.

In the memo, Weiss and CBS News president Tom Cibrowski said their goal was “building a show that thrives in the 21st century.”

“That requires a new approach,” they wrote, defining that approach as “expanding ‘60 Minutes’ beyond a one-hour television broadcast, deepening its role across CBS News, and holding everything we produce to the ambition, fairness, and fearlessness that have defined ‘60 Minutes’ at its best.”

In a termination letter that Politico obtained, Bilton fired Pelley after this outburst, accusing Pelley of "hijacking" his meeting with staff to question his qualifications and said he treated him with "remarkable incvility and contempt."

Full letter from Bilton below (emphasis ours)

Dear Mr. Pelley:

I meant what I said in my letter last week to the 60 Minutes team: joining 60 Minutes is the honor of my career and I am grateful to be working alongside the people who have contributed to the most important television journalism brand this country has ever produced. While I’m new to 60 Minutes, I’ve devoted my career to investigative journalism and storytelling. I started this job excited to collaborate and to benefit from the wisdom and experience of the 60 Minutes veterans, with you among them. For that reason, one of the first things I did in my new role was call you to talk and invite you to dinner. It is a profound disappointment that you rejected that overture and chose ambush instead.

Yesterday, you hijacked my first meeting with staff to disparage me, my qualifications, and my intentions with remarkable incivility and contempt.

I welcome a diversity of viewpoints and respectful debate among the team, but this was nothing of the sort.

Yesterday’s performative display of hostility—enacted in front of the staff instead of in a civil, private conversation—demonstrated that you have no interest in contributing to the future success of the show, or approaching my new tenure with a mind open to collaboration and progress. I am here to deliver first-in-class news programming, not to make headlines about newsroom drama. I am eager to work alongside those who share this goal.

Despite yesterday’s misconduct, I had hoped that in sitting down with you today we could find a path forward together. You made clear that you are not interested in such a path.

Your antipathy to the future of the show has come through loud and clear.

And I have heard you.

I therefore write on behalf of CBS News, Inc. (“CBS”) to inform you that your employment with CBS is terminated for cause effective immediately. Enclosed is your formal termination letter.

Sincerely,
Nick Bilton
Executive Producer, 60 Minutes

Mr. Pelley, in a telephone interview on Tuesday evening shortly after he was fired, told The New York Times that he had devoted decades of his life to “60 Minutes,” which he said he still cared about deeply.

“I have been in combat in Afghanistan,” Mr. Pelley said. “I have been in combat in Iraq. I have been in the war zone in Ukraine multiple times, risking my life and the happiness of my family because of my devotion to the broadcast.”

Pelley issued a statement after his firing (emphasis ours)...

There has never been anything in America like 60 Minutes.

The Sunday tradition is the most successful program of any kind in history. For more than a decade, its innovative growth on every major online platform has extended its reach to countless millions around the world. This spring, at the end of our 58th season, 60 Minutes grew rapidly with an unheard-of 9% jump in viewers on CBS.

"60" has been the number-one program in America for decades because our beloved audience finds integrity, quality, and humanity in our stories. When stewardship of the program passed to my colleagues and me, our responsibility was to expand energetically into a new age of media technology while preserving the values our audience expects. Now, the new owner of our network is casting this legend aside, apparently to curry a moment of favor with the Trump administration.

The waste is heartbreaking.

Last month, 60 Minutes lost its DNA when our entire senior leadership and two of our best on-air correspondents were cruelly fired without cause. Good people were silenced because they stood up for our audience. They stood for fairness against the forces of political bias; they stood for professionalism against chaos.

For my part, new management has instructed me to inject falsehoods and bias into a politically sensitive story. I’ve been told to include assertions that are unverified. To date, in every case, I have managed to ignore these instructions or refuse them. Recently, politicians have been invited to choose correspondents for interviews on the broadcast. Giving politicians control over 60 Minutes interviews is not how this is done. Finally, incompetence and unprofessionalism in the new management have wreaked havoc. In a case involving one of my stories, the entire program came within 19 minutes of not getting on the air at all.

At 60 Minutes, we have fought harder than anyone knows to save the program that became an American icon. We owed that to our millions of viewers. I am deeply moved by the thousands of wishes we have received to "keep up the good fight." Most of the men and women of CBS News are still in that fight. But now the collapse of values at the top has become untenable. The leadership of 60 Minutes is no longer recognizable.

The principles I hold dear are gone, and so I must leave as well.

I depart after 37 years at CBS with one emotion—a heart brimming with gratitude for the men and women of CBS News who encouraged and enriched my work, very often at the risk of their own lives. I pray for a day when those people and their ideals are honored again—a day when sanity, competence, and courage return.

Scott Pelley

We give the final word on this farce to a handful of social media commentators who summed up our feelings rather well:

The arrogance of this pathetic pasty carcass is comical.

— D.C.M (@dc_roark) June 3, 2026

Good riddance. We don’t want to hear these left wing paid liars anymore.

— The North Remembers (@TheNorth212) June 3, 2026

Reading from scripts prepared by Media Matters and the Clintons ruined 60 Minutes.

— Gordon 💥🇺🇸💥✡️ (@StopTheCoup2020) June 3, 2026

Scott Pelley is one more corrupt degenerate Democrat who has contributed to bringing our country to this point of moral and social rot. And he thinks he is the good guy.

Good riddance.

— Augustina 🇻🇦 (@AugustinaJJD) June 3, 2026

What a petty, pontificating jackass.

— Jack Bauer after dark 🇺🇸🇮🇱 (@JackBauerAD) June 3, 2026

Ouch!

Tyler Durden Wed, 06/03/2026 - 12:10

Rabo On Regime-Change At The Fed: What Warsh Can (And Should) Do First

The honeymoon period for Warsh is over.

The FOMC could have given him the professional courtesy of allowing him to settle in, but in recent weeks several Committee participants have staked out their position.

They want to drop the FOMC’s easing bias and instead take a more neutral stance.

This means it will be more difficult for Warsh to convince the Committee of cutting rates anytime soon.

Against that internal pressure, WSJ's Fed whisperer, Nick Timaraos reports that Warsh has tapped two outside associates to advise him while he settles into the job, one of whom previously helped write a conservative blueprint that recommended a radical restructuring of the central bank.

The manifesto drew attention for floating ideas well outside the mainstream of monetary policy, including a menu of overhauls whose top-ranked option was “free banking” - effectively abolishing the Fed in favor of privately issued, commodity-backed currency.

The report included a disclaimer that said the ideas shouldn’t be attributed to any individual and instead synthesized the views of a panel of contributors.

Winfree later distanced himself from the chapter’s more provocative proposals.

“I do think the Fed should be reformed,” he told Roll Call in 2024. “But I would not subscribe to the idea of nuking the Fed.”

As Rabobank details below, the shifting dynamics in the FOMC cannot be seen separately from the developments in the Strait of Hormuz.

As the conflict drags on, energy prices will remain elevated and high inflation sustained for longer.

We flagged repeatedly that given the developments in the Middle East, we were more likely to drop a rate cut from our forecast for 2026 than add one.

Because of the shifting FOMC dynamics and their changed house view of the conflict and its resolution, Rabobank is now adjusting our Fed view.

Shifting FOMC dynamics

As we noted last week, in just a few months, the situation into which Warsh is parachuted has changed dramatically.

At the start of the year, we still expected that the new Chair could convince the FOMC of making three rate cuts before the year had ended.

After the outbreak of the war with Iran, we dropped one rate cut from our forecast.

However, the Strait of Hormuz is still disrupted today and gasoline prices and inflation have continued to rise.

Therefore, we repeatedly flagged that because of the developments in the Middle East, we were more likely to drop a rate cut from our forecast for 2026 than add one. Meanwhile, nonfarm payroll growth has been solid and the unemployment rate has remained at 4.3%.

As a result, the center of the FOMC has moved away from rate cuts.

What’s more, in recent weeks several Committee participants staked out their position.

Governor Waller’s conversion was the most notable. Last summer, he positioned himself as a Trump-loyalist, leading the charge to cut rates, because of increased downside risks to the labor market. After losing out to Warsh in the race for Fed Chair, he is shapeshifting again. Coincidentally, Waller jumped ship on the same day that Warsh was sworn in, making Warsh’s mission even more difficult than it already was.

Moreover, by staying on as Governor, Powell is effectively blocking the addition of another Trump-loyal Governor.

To the new Fed Chair it may feel as if he has been dropped behind enemy lines.

More inflation and less room to cut

Not completely unrelated, the situation in the Strait of Hormuz has dragged on.

RaboResearch has changed its view of the conflict and its resolution and now thinks that the Strait will be closed until September.

This has led to an upward adjustment of our energy price forecasts, which also means that we will adjust our forecasts for US inflation. More details will be provided in our Monthly Outlook next week. With our outlook for inflation higher and more persistent and the FOMC taking defensive positions against the new Chair, we now change our Fed view as well.

Instead of a rate cut in September 2026 and another in December 2026, we now forecast the first cut in October 2026 and the second in January 2027.

So we shift our expected rate cuts one meeting into the future. This means that we now forecast only one rate cut in 2026, instead of two.

At the same time, we add a rate cut to 2027 (previously none). The reason why we still expect the Fed to cut before the end of the year is that the conclusion by many Fed speakers that the labor market has stabilized may be a bit premature. After all, we have only just seen the first back-to-back positive nonfarm payroll growth figures in almost a year. What’s more, the fallout from the war with Iran could have negative repercussions on the real economy, even in the US. It is still a long way to the end of the year and we could easily see a return of downside risk to the labor market before we are there. In this case, the FOMC may reintroduce its easing bias.

For example, in his May 22 speech, Governor Waller said: “With regard to future rate cuts, I am going to need to see improvement on inflation or a significant deterioration in the labor market before I would consider reducing the policy rate.”

Note that he uses “or” instead of “and”, which implies that even without improvement on inflation, the labor market could be a reason to cut.

The Fed may be talking tough now, but they have a history of getting wobbly knees when the economy starts to falter. The reason why we do not shift the previous September cut beyond October, is the midterm election.

If downside risks to the labor market rise in Q3, Warsh will have a strong incentive to push for a rate cut prior to Election Day.

Therefore, the October meeting is his last chance to help boost the chances of the Republican candidates for the Senate and the House of Representatives by cutting rates and giving the stock market a lift.

Conclusion

Instead of delivering the rate cut that President Trump would have preferred, Warsh will likely have to remove the easing bias from the Fed statement at his first FOMC meeting as chair.

A sensible approach for Warsh would be to refrain from pushing for rate cuts in June and July, but instead introduce the analytical framework that will allow the FOMC to resume its prewar path of rate cutting later in the year.

If the current surge in inflation is purely a supply shock, the Fed should be able to look through the high headline inflation figures and focus on core inflation and inflation expectations.

If core inflation picks up substantially and inflation expectations become unanchored, then inflation pressures could become persistent.

However, if we see only a modest rise in core inflation and long-run inflation expectations remain stable, the Fed could resume its pre-war interest rate path, which was sloping downward.

Our forecast is now that the Fed will cut in October 2026 and January 2027, instead of September 2026 and December 2026.

So we move the rate cuts one meeting into the future.

This will still get the federal funds rate to what the median FOMC participant sees as the neutral level, only a little later.

The direction of Warsh’s mission is clear, but he may get there later than the administration might like.

Tyler Durden Wed, 06/03/2026 - 11:55

Goldman Sits Down With Anduril As 'War Unicorns' Reshape Defense Tech

Palmer Luckey’s defense startup, Anduril, is emerging as the Department of War’s answer to the urgent need for affordable, scalable advanced weaponry produced at lightning speed, rather than through the slow, over-budget procurement cycles that have long defined the legacy primes.

The twin conflicts raging across Eurasia and the Middle East, from the Russia-Ukraine war to the U.S.-Iran war, have forever altered modern warfare, with drones, seaborne drones, ground robots, and AI kill chains now reshaping the battlefield.

The quick rise of Anduril, something we call a “war unicorn,” has attracted the attention of Goldman analysts, who recently felt compelled to sit down with Anduril executives to better understand the story and how it will play a major role in the next phase of rebuilding America’s defense-industrial base.

Analyst Noah Poponak recently hosted Anduril co-founder and CEO Brian Schimpf and head of investor relations Allison Lazarus in New York to gain more color on how the defense company is solving the defense industry’s biggest bottleneck, speed.

Oculus headset creator Palmer Luckey, who founded the company in 2017, has focused on building lower-cost, scalable systems in categories such as drones, counter-UAS, and missiles, positioning itself against a legacy defense-industrial base that includes Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and many others.

Here are Poponak's top takeaways after speaking with Anduril executives:

What is Anduril solving for? The U.S. defense industrial base is currently geared towards producing low numbers of expensive, bespoke assets. While these assets are very capable - they have extremely high specifications and performance requirements - they have historically been used in limited quantities, often utilize sole-source specialty materials and components, and have complex manufacturing processes, all of which makes scaled production ramp-ups difficult. More recently, the rate at which these assets have been used in modern conflicts relative to their respective manufacturing footprints and stockpile levels has proven to be high. This has prompted the United States to 1) increase the production rate of these assets, but 2) develop and procure lower-cost alternatives that can be mass-manufactured. This is where Anduril steps in. The company designs its products with affordability and scalability in mind ("affordable mass").

In the long-run, Anduril believes its capability set can be a differentiator, but right now it is prioritizing scalability and speed by focusing on these principles:

1. Vertical integration. When it makes sense to do so, Anduril brings component and module production in-house, decreasing its reliance on external vendors to meet production targets. When the company does rely on external vendors (e.g. Anduril owns the design for a component, but does not produce it in-house), it seeks strategic relationships with commoditized component manufacturers, aiming to avoid the supply chain risks sometimes posed by sole-source suppliers (although this is hard to avoid with modules). Importantly, Anduril is not looking to completely vertically integrate. When the industry has many suppliers of a common item (such as small turbo jets or bolts), Anduril will source that item externally.

2. Component and process commonality across product lines. By utilizing the same components (bearings, bushings, washers, electronic components, materials) across product lines, Anduril simplifies its supply chain and can flex a common inventory pool across products. Having similar production processes allows for an easier manufacturing switch between products.

3. Product simplification and production automation. By designing simpler products, Anduril creates more opportunities for automation, lowers cost, and enables higher production output. A simpler product often times comes with a lower capability set, but there are increasing use cases for these products, as best-in-class assets are not always needed to achieve mission outcomes.

4. Flexible manufacturing facilities. By designing production lines and facilities to rapidly switch between different products, Anduril is able to more quickly meet demand when and where it occurs. This also lowers the risk of idle, dedicated manufacturing space for products not currently in a procurement cycle.

Internal investments create product adoption and margin upside. In our meeting, Anduril stated a near 25% total company operating margin over time is possible. The company derives a high percentage of its revenue from fixed-price work (we estimate that to be between 70-80%), and invests substantially in internal R&D, which, per the company, could allow it to command much higher margins than traditional defense primes over time. Investing ahead of customer demand does entail risk, but the company believes it is advantageous to compete with actual in-production assets versus hypothetical assets or designs when industry RFPs are released, combined with an ability to deliver to schedule. The DoW is increasingly requesting that industry participants invest their own capital into R&D and production, as it fosters faster product iteration and more competition.

DoW acquisition reform - showing early signs of progress. While acquisition processes at the DoW are still complex and can be difficult to navigate, Anduril stated it is seeing improvement at the customer, noting an increased willingness to try new testing, prototyping, and procurement strategies across the services. At an industry-wide level, the DoW is implementing acquisition reform (see our notes here and here), negotiating multi-year framework agreements, prioritizing fixed-price contract terms, investing in companies via equity stakes, and establishing more open test and procurement strategies like the Drone Dominance Program.

What products in the portfolio are seeing momentum?

• Anduril's Fury (YFQ-44A) continues to progress through the USAF's Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) program as it performs aerial testing and enters the production phase at Arsenal-1.
• The company's Dive-XL product is being manufactured for the Royal Australian Navy's Ghost Shark XL-AUV program.
• Anduril recently entered into a framework agreement to produce thousands of Barracuda low-cost cruise missiles in the coming years.
• Anduril's CUAS products continue to gain momentum domestically (USMC) and internationally (to protect critical infrastructure abroad).
• Lattice is critically integrated into Anduril's hardware, but is also used for enterprise-wide / system-wide applications in the military (U.S. Army, U.S. Space Surveillance Network).

Anduril portfolio

Anduril notable awards and programs of record

Anduril fundraising rounds and implied valuation

Anduril M&A timeline

Professional subscribers can read the full Anduril note here at our new Marketdesk.ai portal. 

Tyler Durden Wed, 06/03/2026 - 11:35

Quantum Computing: Hype Or The Real Deal?

Authored by Michael Lebowitz via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

The word “quantum” is defined as “an amount,” with its Latin root meaning “how much.” In physics, a quantum is the smallest discrete unit of any physical property. The adjective form, as in “quantum leap,” describes a sudden, significant, and fundamental change. It is also a perfect adjective for coining the next potential technological innovation—quantum computing.

Quantum computing is being hailed as the next technology to revolutionize computing, following in AI’s footsteps. The headlines below, though confusing for non-quantum experts, are quite impressive:

• Google Unveils ‘Mind-Boggling’ Willow Chip, Solving 10-Septillion-Year Problem in Minutes

• World’s First 10,000-Qubit Processor Achieves 100x Leap in Qubit Count

• JUPITER Supercomputer Breaks World Record with 50-Qubit Quantum Simulation

• Caltech Physicists Build Massive 6,100-Qubit Neutral Atom Array

• A Photon Was Teleported Across 270 Meters in Stunning Quantum Breakthrough

But promising headlines loaded with industry jargon have a long history of appearing well ahead of reality. Accordingly, let’s better understand what quantum computing is, why it matters, and whether the hype is justified and worth investing in.

Classic Computing & Moore’s Law

To understand quantum computing, we need to first understand what bits are.

Every classical computer, from your smartphone and the laptop on your desk to El Capitan, the world’s most powerful supercomputer, operates using bits.

A bit is the fundamental unit of information: it is either a 0 or a 1. Every email you send, video you stream, and game you play is the result of billions of 0s and 1s switching on and off.  Over the last 50+ years, innovations have continually optimized the performance of these binary operations. However, continuing down this path becomes increasingly harder.

Moore’s Law describes computing innovation, while the law’s limits best describe the problem. Moore’s Law states:

The number of transistors on a microchip doubles roughly every two years, while the cost of computers is cut in half.

As the graph below shows, Moore’s law has resulted in exponential growth in computing power at increasingly lower costs. Note that the y-axis is on a log scale, with each tick representing a 100 times improvement in computing power per dollar.

The problem with Moore’s law is that it is limited by physical barriers. Specifically, the ability of chip manufacturers to continually shrink transistors. While there have been many innovations that extend the lifespan of Moore’s Law, the limits dictated by physics are becoming harder and more expensive to overcome.

Quantum Bits

Quantum computing takes a fundamentally different approach than the binary bits used by classical computers. Instead of bits, it uses quantum bits, or qubits.

Unlike bits, which exist only as a 0 or a 1, a qubit can be a 0 and 1, but it can also exist in three additional properties as follows:

• Superposition: A qubit can exist as a 0 and a 1 simultaneously, allowing a quantum computer to explore multiple solutions at the same time.

• Entanglement: Two qubits can become linked such that the state of one instantly determines the state of the other, regardless of the distance between them.

• Interference: Quantum algorithms exploit wave-like behavior to amplify correct answers and cancel out incorrect ones, steering the computation toward the right result.

Confusing? Absolutely, but the critical takeaway is relatively simple.  Quantum computing doesn’t process information sequentially. Instead, it explores many possible solutions simultaneously.

To help better appreciate the difference, let’s consider the task of solving a maze. A classical computer will try one path and, if it fails, try a second, third, fourth, and so on, until it stumbles upon the correct one. A quantum computer explores all possible paths at the same time, thus finding the correct path much more quickly.

For certain applications, such as cryptography, drug discovery, materials simulation, and financial optimization, where the number of potential “paths” is astronomical, quantum computing can significantly reduce computation time. To wit, consider the stunning quote below, courtesy of the New York Times:

Excitement Vs. Reality

Now we must quell the excitement and explain why patience is warranted.

Traditional bits, 0s and 1s, are robust. For instance, they operate efficiently regardless of room temperature or vibrations, like a Wi-Fi signal.

Conversely, qubits are fragile and need to be isolated from the outside world. Any contact with its environment, even something as subtle as a slight temperature change or a vibration, causes it to behave like a classical bit and lose its quantum characteristics.

Accordingly, quantum processors are cooled to temperatures near absolute zero, roughly -460 degrees Fahrenheit. For context, that is about 100 degrees Fahrenheit colder than Pluto’s typical temperature range.

To overcome these obstacles, they are housed in elaborate dilution refrigerators and shielded from interference. Even with these expensive controlled conditions, qubits can make errors at rates that would be unacceptable in classical computing.

Quantum Reliability

The quantum industry measures progress toward reliability using the ratio of logical qubits to raw physical qubits.  A logical qubit is one that has been error-corrected to behave reliably, as opposed to a raw physical qubit, which is prone to mistakes. It currently takes somewhere between 1,000 and 10,000 physical qubits to produce a single reliable logical qubit. To put that in perspective, useful quantum computing requires thousands of logical qubits. Therefore, the total physical count of qubits needs to be in the tens of millions.

Increasing the number of logical qubits is a massive task that engineers are working to overcome.  Accordingly, many researchers think that fault-tolerant machines capable of solving real-world problems are still many years away.

The challenge in building qubits lies in two competing demands. They need to be isolated from the environment to maintain superposition and entanglement. But at the same time, practical enough to build, control, and scale into the millions needed for a useful computer.

No one has figured out the best way to build a qubit; accordingly, scientists are at various stages of developing numerous qubit types.

The graphic below, courtesy of Aliro, summarizes three approaches.  

The answer may be that a hybrid approach or something not yet in development overcomes these challenges.

Investing In Quantum

Despite the potentially long timeline and technological hurdles, the industry is making substantial progress. Accordingly, the investment possibilities are slowly coming into focus.  To help you get started with your research, we provide a snapshot of the publicly traded quantum computing companies.

Keep in mind that IBM, Alphabet, and Microsoft are large companies with numerous streams of substantial revenue. While those cash flows help fund quantum R&D, the ultimate impact of quantum computing on their bottom lines will be diluted by other business lines. IonQ, D-Wave, and Rigetti are quantum-centric companies. Any significant breakthroughs could be extremely valuable to shareholders. However, while they have some revenue to fund R&D, they will be much more dependent on debt and dilutive equity offerings. 

IBM (IBM)

IBM is arguably the most experienced builder in the field. Its Quantum roadmap continues to evolve. The 2026 roadmap below, courtesy of IBM, shows the company is targeting fault-tolerant systems with thousands of logical qubits by 2033. IBM is not solely a quantum computing company. Cash flows from its mainframe and hybrid cloud businesses help fund quantum research and development.

IBM has actively researched quantum computing since the 1970s and launched the IBM Quantum Platform, the first accessible quantum computer on the cloud in 2016. Their long-term commitment and prior successes provide them with a knowledge and infrastructure advantage over their competitors.

Hot off the presses: IBM and the US Commerce Department announced the US’s first purpose-built quantum foundry, supported by a proposed $1 billion chips grant. The funds are part of a $2 billion total going to nine quantum computing companies.

Google (GOOG)

Google achieved one of the field’s most important milestones in December 2024 when its Willow chip surpassed a key threshold. The chip demonstrated what the company called below-threshold quantum error suppression, meaning that adding more qubits reduced error rates rather than compounding them as was the case. In October 2025, Google announced “verifiable quantum advantage,” claiming its Willow chip completed a specific algorithm roughly 13,000 times faster than classical supercomputers. Google’s deep integration with DeepMind and its classical AI capabilities gives it a unique hybrid research platform.

Microsoft (MSFT)

Microsoft has pursued a different technical path, betting on topological qubits. While these qubits are much more stable than those in other approaches, they are incredibly difficult to create and verify in a laboratory setting. Microsoft released its first topological qubit chip in early 2025. Azure Quantum, its cloud platform, has become an important interface layer connecting users to multiple quantum hardware providers, including IonQ and Quantinuum.

IonQ (IONQ)

IonQ is the most prominent pure-play quantum company in the public markets. Rather than producing superconducting qubits, IBM and Alphabet’s approach, IonQ uses trapped-ion technology, in which individual ytterbium ions serve as qubits. The approach runs more slowly but is generally more accurate. In 2025, IonQ became the first quantum company to exceed $100 million in GAAP revenue. It has also been aggressively acquisitive, purchasing Oxford Ionics for approximately $1.1 billion and adding quantum sensing and networking capabilities through several smaller deals.

D-Wave (QBTS)

D-Wave takes a narrow but commercially pragmatic approach. Rather than pursuing universal quantum computing, D-Wave specializes in quantum annealing, a technique to optimize problems in logistics, supply chains, and scheduling. Its products may appeal to a relatively small number of clients, but it is the one generating the most near-term commercial traction. D-Wave’s Advantage systems are in active production use with real enterprise customers today, not just in a lab.

Rigetti Computing (RGTI)

Rigetti is a smaller pure-play competitor focused on superconducting systems. Its Ankaa-3 processor has shown improved interconnect performance. It has faced financial pressure, but it retains a dedicated engineering team and a growing cloud customer base.

Summary

The quantum computing story is real. The question is not whether we will see quantum computers widely used, but when. The underlying physics is sound, the engineering progress is documentable, and the potential applications are significant.

The investment case requires patience and a realistic view of the potentially long timeframe. By most industry estimates, fault-tolerant quantum computing capable of broadly outperforming classical computers on a commercially viable basis is, at least, a decade away. The companies best financially positioned to survive that long a wait are those with diversified revenue streams (IBM, Alphabet, and Microsoft) or near-term niche players like D-Wave.

Given the long development time horizon, the associated financial burden, and the uncertainty about which qubit types and companies will be the winners, we recommend a portfolio approach. A diversified approach ensures greater stability and improves the odds of success. Last, and maybe most important, patience is required, as quantum computing companies, especially the smaller ones, are likely to have fits and starts as they progress.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Wed, 06/03/2026 - 11:15

Ukrainian Drone Smashes Into Russian Passenger Bus, Killing 8 Civilians

The last 48 hours have seen massive, devastating Russian missile and drone attacks on the Ukrainian capital and other cities, which left at 18 dead and over 100 injured. Russia said this was in response to the Starobelsk dormitory attack of last month and other drone attacks targeting Russian territory.

But Ukrainian forces have upped the ante once again, this time with a mass casualty event in Russian-control Donetsk region. "A Ukrainian drone strike killed seven people and wounded 11 others in the occupied Donetsk region after crashing into a passenger bus, Kremlin-installed authorities said Wednesday morning, as overnight attacks killed at least two people in Russia," The Moscow Times reports. State media later revised the death toll up to eight killed.

Widely circulated social media image of bus after drone attack in Donetsk.

The strike happened in the town of Yenakiieve, while the group was being bussed to Simferopol in Crimea, all the way from Moscow on a long-distance route.

"According to preliminary reports, seven civilians were killed," Denis Pushilin, the Kremlin-installed head of the Donetsk People's Republic (DPR), wrote on Telegram. "At least eight people have been killed and 11 others wounded," RT later cited him as indicating.

"The Ukrainian fascists have committed another act of unprecedented, inhumane aggression," Pushilin additionally said. The bus itself was subsequently shown to be utterly destroyed and left as a burned, charred shell.

Perhaps seeking to preempt possible Ukrainian explanations of the bus attack being 'unintentional' - officials have insisted it could not have been an accident:

Russia’s human rights commissioner, Yana Lantratova, asserted that the attack was “not a tragic accident” but rather a “vile, deliberate, and inhumane crime” against non-combatants.

“There are no military objectives that could justify the bloodshed of civilians. There are no arguments that can absolve those who issue and execute such criminal orders from responsibility,” she stressed.

This could invite even greater airstrikes on Kiev, after it has already been hit hard in the latest attacks.

Russian embassies and foreign ministry-connected channels have circulated footage of the attack aftermath:

⚡️ Russian MFA Spox #Zakharova:

The Kiev regime has once again exposed its inhuman Nazi nature by attacking a passenger bus in the DPR, killing 7 civilians.

❗️ We call on all responsible governments & international organizations to condemn this crime.https://t.co/kxslpuGu4Q pic.twitter.com/QacSn2lft5

— MFA Russia 🇷🇺 (@mfa_russia) June 3, 2026

President Putin and top military brass had last month said strikes would be initiated against "decision-making centers" in response to the dorm attack in the Russia’s Lugansk People’s Republic on May 22, which killed 21 people - mostly teenage girls - and injured 70 others.

Kremlin officials now say that Russian forces have "a right to dismantle any infrastructure that supports terrorism." This new bus attack strongly suggests there's no off-ramp or de-escalation on the horizon, but that tit-for-tat strikes will only grow and become more violent.

Tyler Durden Wed, 06/03/2026 - 10:55