YHK - yet another hacker news clone

The AI sell-off compared to well-known stock market crashes

37 points hubraumhugo 3 hours ago 25 comments

bensyverson 2 hours ago | parent

I guess we'll see if it's really a sell-off, or if it was normal market volatility around an election.

mikeweiss 1 hour ago | parent

There's not much normal about the market last 5 years...

metaphor 1 hour ago | parent

I wonder how much of that volatility is directly attributable to SPX 0DTE being a daily thing since circa 2022.

lifeisloving 58 minutes ago | parent

It doesn't fit any normal distribution actually.

ViscountPenguin 56 minutes ago | parent

Normal as in "typical", not as in "Central Limit Theorem".

Wiener processes aren't a completely terrible model for markets though.

fauchletenerum 1 hour ago | parent

The crashes seem be getting smaller and more frequent

eru 1 hour ago | parent

Which would be progress.

A small sell-off is just business as usual.

lifeisloving 57 minutes ago | parent

Who called this small? Datacenter stocks are largely down 50% this month.

fizwidget 35 minutes ago | parent

The further you narrow down to specific industries/companies the more volatile things get. That’s hardly surprising.

The discussion here is around broader stock market indices.

zardo 28 minutes ago | parent

The cheap debt is drying up for neoclouds. New bonds are going to be at payday loan rates.

ion_trapper 1 hour ago | parent

The beauty of increasingly efficient markets.

adrianN 52 minutes ago | parent

I don't think the efficient market hypothesis says anything about the convergence time or the path to convergence, but I'm not an economist.

shalmanese 34 minutes ago | parent

I think that's just you noticing smaller blips in the market as you pay more attention. Markets are random walks so they exhibit a fairly fixed distribution of different sized crashes. If they deviated, someone could notice that pattern and trade on it, returning the market back to a random walk.

pamcake 1 hour ago | parent

Isn't it overly bullish plus quite early to refer to this as "The AI sell-off"?

devin 42 minutes ago | parent

Do you mean bearish?

Maybe. Nobody can see the future, so I agree it's kind of arbitrary to call this the sell-off, but plotting it against these other events over the coming months may be interesting, and you have to start somewhere.

lelanthran 57 minutes ago | parent

It's a bit early to be calling it, I think.

A sell-off is required to start a panic-sell and bubble-pop, but not all sell-offs start a panic-sell and bubble-pop.

It's hard to tell in advance what this is.

Animats 26 minutes ago | parent

Yes. This is just the first day.

It's going to take a year or two more. Will the humanoid robots being built be useful? Will Tesla's robotaxi ever work without a huge number of remote monitors? Will the free models start to displace the expensive ones? Will someone figure out a way to do all this at lower cost? We don't know yet. But there are too many huge companies with rather inflated market caps. Some of that has to be air.

jasonkhanlar 55 minutes ago | parent

Reminder NVDA market capitalization skyrocketed around the time Brett Harrison and Leopold Aschenbrenner exited from FTX.

Lerc 54 minutes ago | parent

I have seen a few YouTube Thumbnails declaring the bursting of the AI bubble. It feels like they are so desperate for it to happen that they are not prepared to wait a week or two to actually have some real data to work with.

It's not like people will forget that they were predicting it. If it is inevitable it will happen, if it isn't inevitable it still might happen. If it bounces back it still might happen six months down the track. Declaring it to have already happened seems reckless if your intention was to inform. We will know soon enough. I guess at least they have staked there credibility on something falsifiable. It won't make them retroactively less reckless if they turn out to be right but it'll make them seem particularly foolish if they are wrong.

lconnell962 32 minutes ago | parent

Between it and the "next housing bubble" getting predicted I almost wonder if there's some kind of stock market psychology to bullheaded resistance in the face of "it will fail" predictions.

That on something big if you have enough people constantly predicting it's upcoming failure people just keep investing anyway keeping it going. Never really sure if something is on life support or not.

usernomdeguerre 43 minutes ago | parent

Or this is a correction that has already happened in other markets, and is now unwinding here:

https://www.reuters.com/world/china/china-ai-bubble-has-alre...

yipinwong 25 minutes ago | parent

both the media and the post is making a deal out of nothing.

When the author is right, he will be like, "i told you so", if wrong, "It's hard to predict" and shrug off.

Don't buy into crap post like this.

rmah 25 minutes ago | parent

There are always bears who are predicting the next stock market crash. They always have various reasons that make sense on the surface. They're almost always wrong. But they're always eventually right.

howunfortunate 22 minutes ago | parent

> But they're always eventually right.

Can you really call it "right" if the market goes up 40% before eventually going down 15%?

cgio 14 minutes ago | parent

Maybe it’s because a behemoth ipo is coming and investment bankers are at work.