| Taskmaster4450. | Activity

YouTube Now The Largest Media Company taskmaster4450 (85)in LeoFinance • last month Cover Image YouTube is now larger than Disney. Let that sink in for a moment. The revenues for YouTube topped $60 billion in 2025, surpassing Disney. This is a historic moment. YouTube had more than $60 billion in revenue in 2025, parent company Alphabet reported last month. Now, the influential financial research firm MoffettNathanson runs the numbers and comes to the conclusion that YouTube’s estimated $62 billion in 2025 will have allowed it to pass The Walt Disney Co.’s media business, which generated $60.9 billion last year (excluding Disney’s lucrative experiences division). We not only see this in revenues; it is also reflected in the valuation. While YouTube's value is an estimate, it does speak to what is taking place. The firm, which declared YouTube the “new king of all media” last year, is now valued at between $500 billion-$560 billion, far above any traditional media competitors. The closest would be Netflix, which has a market cap of about $409 billion as of writing. This is evidence of a major transition taking place. I long wrote how Hollywood is cooked. The epicenter for media is now shifting. YouTube Now The Largest Media Company Los Angeles is the obvious loser in this. What was once the entertainment capital of the world is no more. The new distribution channel is showing the effects. It was overlooked for decades yet it taking hold. For the industry, it is too late. When we couple this with generative AI, the situation becomes even more dire for traditional Hollywood. AI-generated content is already being integrated into production workflows—from scriptwriting assistance to visual effects to post-production editing. What was once a fringe concept relegated to tech forums is now mainstream conversation. Major publications like The New York Times, Variety, and The Wall Street Journal are running serious pieces on how generative AI will reshape entertainment production, reduce headcount, and lower barriers to entry for creators. The Writers Guild and SAG-AFTRA's recent labor agreements included specific clauses around AI usage, signaling that the industry recognizes this isn't theoretical anymore—it's happening now. As another round of labor negotiations approaches, studios will push harder for AI carve-outs and cost reductions. Creators and talent will fight back, but the leverage has fundamentally shifted. The combination of YouTube's dominance, Netflix's proven streaming model, and now AI-powered production tools means the traditional studio system—which relied on scarcity, gatekeeping, and expensive infrastructure—has lost its moat. For an industry already bleeding audience share and facing margin pressure, this convergence could accelerate the timeline toward irrelevance far more quickly than anyone anticipated just five years ago. AI is accelerating and more people are starting to utility it. This benefits YouTube at the cost of the movie studios. Analysts Are Agreeing Those who watch the industry, from a financial perspective, are starting to pick up on it. When Wall Street latches onto a narrative, it can spread. “There are two really fundamental things that we do for creators,” YouTube CEO Neal Mohan told The Hollywood Reporter last year, just a few hours after announcing the milestone. “One is help them build an audience and connect with their fans, regardless of where those fans are in the world; and the second thing we do is we help them build businesses. That’s what that $100 billion represents for me.” MoffettNathanson argues that the scale as a distributor, both of pay-TV and of creator-led content, will help it continue its explosive growth. So will its heavy investment into AI tools, which will allow creators to produce more content at a faster cadence. Source As with anything today, speed is key. The fact that generative AI will allow content creators to produce more output at a faster pace gives us insight into what is happening. The numbers simply work against the studios. Think of this as an oil tanker against a fleet of speed boats. Naturally, the size means the tanker is a monumental force. However, it does not maneuver like speedboats and can be overwhelmed with the numbers. Since costs will be going to near-free, this means that volume is the deciding factor. Some claim that we are reverting back to a time where storytelling becomes crucial. Maybe that is true. One would think this favors the traditional system. It does not. The problem is that Hollywood got away from creativity. Over the last decade plus the tendency was to leverage existing properties. Marvel, LucasFilm, and other franchises simply churned out more of the same. Sprinkle in some messaging and audiences have turned their attention elsewhere. Box office numbers reflect this problem. Streaming, which was heralded as the savior, was a sinkhole of cash for everyone other than Netflix. Having a money loser as the savior is not a healthy position to be in. Technology is taking over many industries. This trend is just getting started. Tech companies are going to be educators, healthcare providers, entertainment entities, and financial firms. Ask a tech executive what business they are in and the answer is "anyone we want." The largest media company is now in Silicon Valley. That is quite a shift. #leofinance#hollywood#disney#youtube#media#revenue#neoxian#inleo

Tue, 14 Apr 2026 07:59:19 +0000

YouTube Now The Largest Media Company
taskmaster4450 (85)in LeoFinance • last month
Cover Image

YouTube is now larger than Disney.

Let that sink in for a moment. The revenues for YouTube topped $60 billion in 2025, surpassing Disney.

This is a historic moment.

YouTube had more than $60 billion in revenue in 2025, parent company A…Read More

Changing Population Within US Altering Economy taskmaster4450 (85)in LeoFinance • 5 days ago Sometimes we can garner an understanding by looking at the 'states within the state'. The United States has a varied economy. This is not only true across the multitude of industries but also shows up when looking at different regions. When it comes to power, economic productivity is a centerpiece. Areas that are producing find themselves amassing resources. This comes in both the form of assets as well as political power. The representative system the US employs is based upon population. For example, Congressional seats (in the House) are determined by the population a state has. Those with larger populations have more seats. What is important is the changes over time. Here is where we see political power potentially changing. At the same time, the economic output of an area tends to increase with population growth. With more people, basic infrastructure and services are required. The reverse is also true if the population declines. Changing Population Within US Altering Economy For decades, California and New York were at the forefront of the United States. The former was the dominant player in technology along with having Hollywood. This provided the state with the ability to be the cultural leader also. In fact, since Hollywood productions went global, it could be said that it influenced the entire planet. Over the past 5 years, I wrote how Hollywood is cooked. This is evidenced by this article which tells how YouTube is dominating streaming. New York and California are facing competition on other fronts. Over the past decade, Texas and Florida made enormous gains. We see this in both population and GDP. Here is a chart that compared the two categories of these four states. image These numbers are impressive, especially in the GDP category. If we looked at these totals on a global scale, we find this: image While the US would place 4 in the top 15 (against countries), there is a shift taking place within the United States. The Change Over Time Capital flow is a crucial component in economic activity. There is an old saying: capital goes where it is treated best. Over the last few years, a large number of companies, along with high wealth individuals, have relocated. This has shifted billions of dollars in capital. Eventually, that is going to have a major impact. As we can see the last numbers are a couple years old. My guess is 2025 saw the trend continuing, if not accelerating. Each time a major corporation moves its headquarters, economic productivity shifts. On the population front, we see California and New York registering 56.7 million people in 2010. That total is now 58.4 million. In contrast, Texas and Florida has 43.9 million in 2010. Due to the growth of those states, 2024 saw 54.7 million. The gap has basically closed. As stated, this is having an impact in the political arena. Economically, we are also seeing a shift, although less than with population. This makes sense since there is often a lag. The relocation of people can come in many forms, including retirees who tend not to be major contributors to economic output, at least in contrast to the younger counterparts. The combined GDP of California and Texas, in 2010, was $3.3 trillion. In 2024, it stood at $6.4T. Texas and Florida saw their numbers go from $2.2T to $4.4T. It did an exact doubling whereas the others were $200 billion below that. Again, a small difference but one that could be telling. We saw a lot of capital shifting. I already mentioned the companies relocating. There is another factor that one needs to consider. When looking at foreign investment, where does this money end up? Is it going to those who are setting up shop (or operating) in the first group or the second? All of this brings into question how power is shifting. JPMorgan has more employees in Texas than New York. SpaceX is going public with the largest IPO in history. Most of the operations are in Texas and Florida. Texas is opening up a new stock exchange to compete with New York. Oracle, Texas, and Chevron all moved their headquarters to Texas (from California) in the last few years. This is combined with many billionaires moving. Carl Icahn, the Google Boys, and Ken Griffith all headed to Florida. We will have to watch to see how this changes over the rest of the decade. My conclusion is we are seeing an acceleration. The 2030 numbers should be interesting. #leofinance#florida#california#texas#newyork#gdp#population#inleo

Thu, 09 Apr 2026 01:36:54 +0000

Changing Population Within US Altering Economy
taskmaster4450 (85)in LeoFinance • 5 days ago
Sometimes we can garner an understanding by looking at the ‘states within the state’.

The United States has a varied economy. This is not only true across the multitude of industries but also shows up when looking at different regions.

When it c…Read More

Post Labor Economics - Universal High Income taskmaster4450 (85)in LeoFinance • 6 days ago Things are starting to get very interesting. We are seeing a massive shift in how productivity is derived. It is a transition that will only continue over the next 10 years. At the core, as mentioned in the past, is the fact that the labor-capital equation, which is the basis of our economy, is changing. Actually, this isn't a new concept since it really started in the 1970s. The percentage of labor as a total component of the economy has steadily declined. Ultimately, workers are taking home less of the total. Of course, this causes many with political agendas to promote ideas that are in alignment instead of solving the problem. One major challenge is few even mention the problem. Productivity increases at a pace faster than wages due to automation. The next decades is expected to put this concept on steroids. Sadly, this is an issue which should have been addressed decades ago. Because it wasn't, some of the viable options will be delayed in having impacts. Post Labor Economics - Universal High Income Elon Musk and others have mentioned the concept of "Universal High Income". How could something such as this be achieved? To really grasp the concept, we need to understand the different funding mechanisms a household has. Here is where breaking out of the ideological mindsets is important. There are three ways in which households get income: wages capital transfers This is mostly self explanatory. Wages are just that. Capital is money that comes as a result of owning an asset. This can be dividends, capital gains, rent and royalties. The one area that might confuse people is transfers. This is money that goes from a government to individual (or family) benefit. Most think of direct payments such as food stamps or UBI. That said, this is more expansive. Things such as public healthcare, entitlement programs, and education are included. So are public highways and libraries. Here is the important factor: these are the only three buckets to pull from. Hence, if one declines, it is necessary to increase the others. Without that, the household income will decline, if not fall off a cliff. This has ramifications on the economy since we operate under this basic structure. image Since many developed countries as consumer spending as the basis, we can see, if we follow the path, how the entire system can implode. So what is the answer? It is a multi-pronged approach that few are considering. Multiple Streams of Income The key is going to be focusing upon the capital and transfer options. Here I have to caution against thinking of this in terms of private versus public. Many will conclude that capital is private (capitalism) whereas transfers are public (socialism). This is where the ideological mindset needs to shift. For example, the US government passed into law a savings account for children. The government will contribute $1,000 upon the birth of each child born over a 13 year period. In addition, the parents can contribute up to $5,000 each year. The money is locked up until the age of 18, at which time it can be withdrawn. This is an example of a capital fund. It is financed by the government but can be enhanced by the private sector. Michael Dell and his wife announced they were contributing $6.25 billion to the program. A program that is often cited is the Alaska Permanent Fund, which pays residents of that state an average of about $1,200 each year. This is a 50 year old fund that is financed through the profits of the oil rights agreements the state has.In the US, there are 4 such funds at the state level. Then we can take a look at ESOPs, DAOs, Co-Ops and other innovative financial structures that can provide incomes on a regular basis. All of this falls under the capital heading. Of course, we didn't even mention things such as private investments and other personal business investments. As we can see, this is much larger than just UBI. Universal High Income Is Universal High Income possible? The answer is yes. We are likely to see such a massive increase in productivity that the wealth generated will usurp anything the masses can comprehend. I am on record as saying the economic singularity will be reached in 10-15 years. The contingency is how fast robotic scaling takes place. Nevertheless, I define this as a 30% annual growth rate in GDP, keeping in mind the flaws with that metric. It simply does not work well in a deflationary environment. Even worse, it completely fails when dealing with a "disappearing environment". This is another factor to consider. So far, the idea is lost on the younger generations. Those who are around 50 or older can comprehend it. There was a time where we paid for things that are now basically free. Long distance communication is an example. That does not exist on a household balance sheet. Technology made the long distance phone bill obsolete. Yet, in spite of that, we have not only faster communication, we can also do it in multi-media. This is a factor to consider. Economic output is still the driver. With the expected increase, we can see how this is going to affect things. The question remains will we have Universal High Income or will only a few reap the rewards? To achieve the former steps must be taken. Adopting a wealth mindset is crucial for everyone involved in the discussion. This is no longer public versus private. Creativity and commitment is required. For example, investment in funds on behalf of the citizens is something that must be looked at by every level of government. In today's political environment, that is impossible. Sadly, politicians only react and this will be the case here. Individuals really need to start talking about this topic to ensure that people start to pay attention. We are going to see a massive shift in the economy. Those who realize it have time to make the proper moves. Failure to do so will be catastrophic.

Sat, 04 Apr 2026 15:11:02 +0000

Post Labor Economics – Universal High Income
taskmaster4450 (85)in LeoFinance • 6 days ago
Things are starting to get very interesting. We are seeing a massive shift in how productivity is derived. It is a transition that will only continue over the next 10 years.

At the core, as mentioned in the past, is the fact that the labor-capital e…Read More

The New Reality of Money taskmaster4450 (85)in LeoFinance • The death of the US dollar crowd is consistent. Being wrong for decades certainly doesn't hinder their enthusiasm. Unfortunately, these people are about a century out of date. The old rules no longer apply. That said, even the ones that were in place are misread and completely mangled by most people. We are in the digital age. This might have gone unnoticed by some. This means that we are dealing with a new basis of how things operate. Money was affected as much as anything else, a fact overlooked by the masses. Does this mean the US dollar will remain the global reserve currency forever? No. There is an end game. However, it is not quite how people expect. Of course, outlining what happens requires enormous speculation. Predicting the future with regards to technology is difficult. With the advancement of how things are unfolding, it is near impossible to see how this will evolve. The New Reality of Money We all heard "the printing press goes brr." This is a favorite of the death of the dollar crowd. Here is where we have the first challenge. Central banks do not print currency anymore. The amount of transactions that occur in physical dollars is miniscule. For the US, most of that activity occurs outside its borders since almost 3/4 of all banknotes are in foreign lands. The quantity theory of money was disproven decades ago. Milton Friedman wrote deeply about this topic. What is passed over in his work is that he didn't talk about the quantity in isolation. Instead, it was the rate of currency expansion compared to the growth of economic expansion. If the latter exceeded the former, then the increase in money supply was warranted. When the Fed engages in its "easing", it does not create legal tender. Digital reserves are not dollars. Instead, they are bank instruments that can be redeemed for physical dollars. The problem is the banking system will never redeem them for banknotes. Is JPMorgan going to house $750 billion in $20 bills? Not a chance. Basically the Fed is creating digital financial instruments that lack velocity. The utility is very limited. There is no broad economy penetration due to the fact that holders require a Master Account with the Fed. Again, this is not legal tender. It is a closed loop which these "dollars" operate within. The true impact is psychological, the primary tool central banks use today. Their monetary policy is useless since they do not control the money supply. It is pure theater. The New Basis Of Money When the Internet was introduced, many were touting the new economy. This was the belief that the digital economy would take over. Obviously, this was a bit early since it took decades for this to evolve. We are near the point now where there is validity to this idea. That said, there is still a large basis of physical economy that still usurps the digital. When it comes to money, it is no longer about quantity or even rate of growth. None of that matters. These ideas are not congruent with the digital realm, where money now overwhelmingly exists. Digging into the basics of the digital world reveal something very interesting about money, especially the US dollar. The entire basis boils down to network effects. This is it. We see this clearly in the social media world. It is also evident with online shopping. Notice how a few entities dominate. Over time, these effects become self-feeding, increasing the flywheel effect that is enjoyed. Money falls into the same lines. In the digital world, there is no limit. This means the numerator, in our inflation equation, is nearly infinite. How much can be bought online? For example, how many version of the song "Paint it Black" by the Rolling Stones can you buy from iTunes? The limit is not number but, rather, bandwidth. When looking at a currency, what are the network effects it enjoys? Here is where the US dollar's dominance is evident. We have it being the FOREX pair at an 88% clip. Forex derivatives are 75% USD denominated. Invoicing is done overwhelmingly in USD. The US treasury market is the largest and most liquid. In short, nothing is close. Remember how this becomes self feeding. A newer technology, stablecoins, are starting to take hold. Guess which currency they are being issued in? USD-to-Post Monetary Society What will knock the US dollar off the throne? The answer is not "nothing". We are going to see a change. That said, it is not going to be another currency in my view. At least, it will not be something that we commonly think about when we hear that term. I think the USD will carry us to a post-monetary society. When this happens and what it will look like is open to a wide range of speculation. The honest answer is we have no idea how things will be when we get there. Technology is deflationary. This means that anything that gets blasted by technology gets cheaper over time. We saw this with compute, something that is now equating to units of cognition. The entire premise of knowledge work is being disrupted. My best guess is that "currency" will be tied to energy. This means the USD could be replaced by kilowatts or joules. One thing we have to resist is the tendency to apply what we know about the economy to this future time. There is no guarantee that transactions will operate in the same manner. The digital world is one of abundance. Our economy's central premise is scarcity. Here is where the two worlds are going to collide. Technology is rapidly moving us towards abundance. What role does currency have? What about money? Is it something that is even necessary? Today, we can only forecast what we believe. The reality might be different. For now, the important take away is we are looking at an expanding digital world. The next decade will see that enter into the physical. The net result is abundance. That means the laws of the Internet are in play. Since the winners are determined by network effects. we can apply the same premise to money.

Thu, 26 Mar 2026 00:05:54 +0000

The New Reality of Money
taskmaster4450 (85)in LeoFinance •

The death of the US dollar crowd is consistent. Being wrong for decades certainly doesn’t hinder their enthusiasm.

Unfortunately, these people are about a century out of date. The old rules no longer apply. That said, even the ones that were in place are misread and completely m…Read More

Bitcoin As Digital Gold - Breaking Down? Bitcoin was first touted as the replacement for the US dollar. This narrative has broken down except with the biggest of Maxis. Now the idea is that Bitcoin is digital gold. It is not a medium of exchange. Instead, people are looking at it as a store of value. Recently, the price of gold has taken off while Bitcoin has dropped a ton. The price went from $125K to the present level of under $90K. So what is going on? Are we looking at the death of the "store of value" narrative for Bitcoin? Let us take a look at this. Bitcoin As Digital Gold - Breaking Down? Let us start by saying the store of value idea is a stretch at best. The business cycle is always in operation. I know there are many who believe that this can be combatted. It is interesting to see central bankers and gold bugs both buying into the concept that the business cycle can be altered. In fact, this was the basis for Karl Marx entire thesis. When the business cycle takes a turn down, asset prices follow. The reverse is also true. Hence, purchasing power increases as things turn worse while decreasing in expanding economies. Of course, wages tend to follow the same pattern. When the economy is in the toilet, jobs are lost. Companies tighten their belts. Again, when things turn around, eventually, there is a battle for labor. Gold has caught quite a run the last year or so. The move was astounding. Many will claim the manipulation of gold, even though there are a number of major trading centers around the world, is ending. That is more justification. Here is the reality with gold: It is not a hedge against inflation. Lay the CPI (or whatever inflation indicator) chart over gold price and see how they do not operate in correlation. We had a 40 year record in the CPI post-COVID and gold didnt move. What gold is a hedge against is uncertainty. This is where we see the major move. When Putin invaded Ukraine, it set the world on its ear. Now, we are seeing calls for World War 3, something that is hard to dispute is coming. This makes gold very attractive. It is a metal that can be moved. People accept it all over the world. Of course, government can confiscate it as we saw repeatedly throughout history. That said, it is a safer play than real estate when the war drums are being beaten. Bitcoin - Speculative Asset Bitcoin might eventually get to the same point as gold. What is obvious is we are not there yet. Nothing says that Bitcoin is anything more than a speculative asset. In other words, we are still in the "price go up" era. What will cause that to change? This is where the transition, if it will occur, takes place. It starts with traditional HODLers. This is not the retail buyer. Instead, we are referring to entities such as central banks and governments. These are the kings of buy and hold. They often acquire assets in large chunks and do not sell except in dire situations. The Fed will alter its holdings of Treasuries by a wide margin. When it comes to other assets such as gold, they tend not to change it much (except to periodically add more). If Bitcoin is the ultimate HODL asset, then it can end up being a store of value in the general sense. There will always be supply and demand issue, which is altered by the business cycle. Nevertheless, the downside can be limited as more of the supply is held. Fixed money always pools so it will happen with $BTC. Right now, the largest of money players are not buying Bitcoin, at least publicly. Hence the media coverage can get extremely bearish. We will see if moves are made in 2026 that alters this arrangement. Last year, many governments looked at adding digital assets to their holdings. Will there be follow through this year? Posted Using INLEO

Sat, 07 Mar 2026 03:50:26 +0000

Bitcoin As Digital Gold – Breaking Down?

Bitcoin was first touted as the replacement for the US dollar. This narrative has broken down except with the biggest of Maxis.

Now the idea is that Bitcoin is digital gold. It is not a medium of exchange. Instead, people are looking at it as a store of value.

Recently, the price of gold has taken…Read More

Meta To Integrate Stablecoins Meta has 3.2 billion users, giving it the largest user base of any social media company in the world. This means anything the company does has enormous impact. What does the integration of stablecoins by Meta do for the crypto world? Consider the premise of value being transferred across Facebook, Instagram or Messenger. Suddenly, 1/3 the planet has instant access to crypto. A Meta wallet would provide easy onboarding. After all, it would be tied to one's Meta account. Of course, this brings up other issues which we will discuss below. How likely is this? According to Zuckerberg and company, we could see this by the second half of 2026. Meta To Integrate Stablecoins Meta is shifting its approach. It is ironic that it is just entering the game now, especially considering Meta's early positioning in this space. This was the company that was first to jump on the stablecoin bandwagon, at least among the Big Tech players. Meta had the first-mover advantage—a position most companies would kill for—yet regulatory headwinds forced them to retreat entirely from the sector. While competitors sat on the sidelines, Meta had already done the groundwork, built the infrastructure thinking, and understood the regulatory landscape. Now, years later, they're essentially re-entering a market that has matured dramatically without them, having to rebuild credibility and catch up to where they already were. In 2019, the company rolled out Libra, later named Diem. Pushback from regulators in both the US and EU caused the company to erase those plans. Concerns grew about the reach of the company causing too many anti-trust concern along with stablity issues regarding the financial system. At that time, the stablecoin market was $1 billion. Today, it is north of $300 billion. Meta plans to get involved by integrating 3rd parties. This will keep the regulators at bay since there is not "Metacoin" on the way. Instead, platforms like Stripe could be incorporated in. There is also the potential for Meta to simply develop wallet technology (or buy it). Here is where some conerns might arise. Big Tech Taking Over Is it a surprise that Big Tech is taking over? With all the discuss about AI, this is the path we are heading down. Nobody can compete head on with these companies. In this article we are discussing crypto. Actually, what Meta is focusing upon is payments. The financial arena faces a very large elephant entering the room. Of course, I often discuss how another industry, Hollywood is facing radical altering due to Big Tech. When you ask most CEOs what business they are in, you will get a direct answer. They will say automotive, home improvement, or real estate. With technology CEOs, the answer is "any business we want." We are seeing that coming to fruition. With Meta, there is another component to this discussion. It is the merging of AI with finance. Since stablecoins are ideal for payments, what better way to increase utility on AI agents? By adding monetization, agents can become financial and commerical entities. They instantly have the ability to conduct financial transactions. The passage of the GENIUS Act in the United States was destined to change the entire financial sector regarding payments. Stablecoin adoption is going to explode. A company like Meta entering the arena is surely to accelerate things. It is too large a player to be ignored. Consider the mechanics: Meta's 3.2 billion users represent an unparalleled distribution channel. If even a fraction of them adopt stablecoin payments through Facebook, Instagram, or Messenger, you're looking at adoption curves that would typically take years compressed into months. This isn't just another crypto company launching a token—this is a payments infrastructure that already touches nearly half the planet's population. The mainstream adoption question hinges on friction. Today, getting into crypto requires downloading wallets, managing seed phrases, and understanding blockchain basics. Meta removes that friction entirely. A user already logged into Instagram could send a stablecoin payment the same way they'd send a message. That simplicity is the killer app the industry has been missing. This move could make stablecoin usage mainstream not because of marketing hype, but because it solves the actual problem of accessibility. The precedent is clear: when Big Tech integrates a technology, adoption typically follows. Email went mainstream through AOL and Outlook. Video went mainstream through YouTube. Stablecoins could follow the same trajectory, especially if Meta positions them as a seamless payments layer rather than a speculative asset. Things are about to get very interesting. Posted Using INLEO

Thu, 05 Mar 2026 15:29:26 +0000

Meta To Integrate Stablecoins

Meta has 3.2 billion users, giving it the largest user base of any social media company in the world. This means anything the company does has enormous impact.

What does the integration of stablecoins by Meta do for the crypto world?

Consider the premise of value being transferred across Facebook, Instagram…Read More

The Accelerating Pace of AI It is over. Time for the fat lady to sing. While estimates vary, we are embarking upon the Age of Intelligence. This means that AGI, ASI, and singularity are in play. For the most part, these can be viewed as academic terms. Benchmarks in the AI world are widely used by analysts. However, they ultimately mean nothing. The key is adoption. This is directly tied to utility. We see the enterprise world lagging since there is inherent inertia within companies. It is something that doesn't change but, rather, get worked through. Industries are adapting. While it is not at the same pace as the overall advancement, we see how this is radically altering the future. Anyone who watched what happened the last 12 months realizes we are seeing a trajectory never witnessed before. In this article I will delve into how it is a done deal. The Accelerating Pace of AI Over the last few years I focused a lot of attention on Hollywood. This was the ideal candidate to watch for AI disruption. The reasons are many. To start, it is an unregulated business. Many talk about the need for AI in healthcare and education. The inertia here is huge, with regulation stopping progress in many areas. This will only slow the inevitable but it does cause a delay. The other reason why Hollywood is ripe for disruption is because it is a 2 dimensional world. Think about that for a moment. Most of what we consume, including all that is related to actors and actresses, are 2D figures. Unless you happened to see one in person, how do you know if he or she is real? For the moment, it is obvious. The future, nonetheless, will not be that way. A final reason is the movie stack. We often look at the part the public sees. There are a lot of jobs impacted by changes to the stack. For example, when a scene is generated, that affects costume people, set designers, laborers, and script writers. All are apt to take a hit, albeit not uniformly. Anyone who looked at an exponential curve can start to see how video generators, as an example, have progressed. AI is a major topic during the early labor discussions with the movie studios. Corporations Are Panicking In public, CEOs are playing it cool. In reality, boardrooms are panicking. The entire equation is changing before everyone's eyes. Some claim that we have AGI already. This is, of course, disputed. Others are more optimistic believing the singularity is already here. Again, this might be nothing more than definitional exercises, amounting to little in the real world. Executives do not care what it is labeled. The concern is what impact this has on the business. One of the main issues that few understand is how the Foundry Window was obliterated. The Foundry Window: The current critical period (approximately 18 months) during which the technical standards, data rights, and supply chains for the AI age are being set ("hardening"). This means new dependencies are being hardcoded into the substrate. It is a risk for old guard companies since being on the outside amounts to certain demise. One shift we see is away from the basis of operation. When we look at metrics, everything is changing. Is EBITA even valid anymore? For now, the answer is yes. However, in 24 month, past the 18 month Foundry Window, it might not be. What metric should be focused upon? That is still wide open. Nevertheless, perhaps we are looking at something tied to energy. If electricity transforms into cognitive ability, then we are looking at the potential for a metric such as return on kWh (or something to that effect). Return on Capital takes on a different meaning. Basically, all companies will be based upon the return of money spend on generating cognitive output. When we think about tying this into robots, it becomes clear how this transitions from the 2D realm to 3D. While the focus is upon Google, OpenAI, xAI, and Nvidia, the reality is that we might see the biggest impact taking place with the toilet manufacturer. The present leader is the one at risk of being left behind. Rinse and repeat. Many want to compare the path of AI to the Internet. The latter was networking. This is a different realm since we are dealing with a new form of compute. Moore's Law was the standard in that realm for decades. That is now a tortoise. AI is a hare with a rocket tied to its back. Do not buy into the naysayers who cite present limitations. This is the worst the technology will ever be. Let that sink in.

Sun, 22 Feb 2026 15:12:19 +0000

The Accelerating Pace of AI

It is over. Time for the fat lady to sing.

While estimates vary, we are embarking upon the Age of Intelligence. This means that AGI, ASI, and singularity are in play. For the most part, these can be viewed as academic terms. Benchmarks in the AI world are widely used by analysts. However, they ultimately mean…Read More

Post-Labor Economy - Economic Redesign Automation is radically transforming the economy. This is not a process that started in the last few years. It is more than half a century of change that is starting to have severe impact. When we talk about automation, in the economics sense, it is anything that is a labor saving activity. For decades, we saw this in the form of computers or industrial robots. Of course, as they say, you ain't seen nothing yet. We are about, according to many, to see an explosion with regards to automation. Some still contest the idea, noting all the present limitations of AI (as an example). The challenge with this point of view is the fact that many of those limitations are eliminated with each new update of a model. Then we have humanoid robots on the horizon. This is a major problem because there is nothing that says humans have a moat around cognition or labor producing work. Here is where the post-labor economy can take hold. Post-Labor Economy - Economic Redesign Our present economy is rather simple. The basic design is as follows: Central bank liquidity ---> Commercial Bank lending ----> Business Investment -----> Household income through wages ------> Household spending Where we have an issue is the entire model breaks down if hiring ceases. Since the majority of the economy is due to household spending, the removal of income via wages is catastrophic. Here is where many are starting to voice concern. We are rapidly heading towards an adjustment as the labor component of the economy declines further. It already dropped globally over the last few decades, a fact that pushes trillions of dollars more into capital as opposed to wages. This is not a new story. Economists discussed it for a number of decades. The question on the minds of many is how to handle it? Dividend Based Economy We have UBI and other such proposals. This ultimately is nothing more than a transfer of funds, something that historically has not worked. Automation offers a feature that is overlooked. Perhaps the solution is contained in the threat. What we are looking at is automation rewiring the entire economy. Economic productivity is likely to explode as automation consumes more of the output. Here is where we see a tremendous opportunity. The skyrocketing of economic productivity means capital benefits greatly. After all, we see hundreds of billions (moving to trillions) going into data centers and robotics. The key is simply to own some of the means of production. It is where the idea of a dividend enters. We could structure the economy where people simply get paid on the output of the means of production. It is no different from how it works now. The difference is that one is not getting a little bit for the time provided. Instead, one has ownership in the capital asset base. How does this happen? The first is simply to focus upon those entities which are developing these systems. While owning a stock like Home Depot might make sense from a present day ROI, it is unlikely this company is going to be one of the major players in the automation realm. Instead, Google, Meta, Nvidia, and companies such as these are the ones to look at. Another step could be the idea of a sovereign wealth fund. Governments are going to lose also since tax revenue is going to decline along with household incomes. Therefore, there is incentive to keep the income up. We could see this adjusted from the wage based system to one where dividends make up the bulk of the payments. Since capital can be used to generate productivity, governments only need to follow what Big Tech is doing. Future compute needs are going to be near unlimited. We could see governments involved the same as the private sector. The public fund is provides dividend capital to its population. This is where one simply gets paid for being a citizen. It is no different than the Alaska Wealth Fund which takes oil payments and provides a dividend to its people. Major governments purchase a ton of GPUs. They have a lot of software that is written by engineers. With AI getting more advanced, governments can simply get into the game providing a "commons" to the population. The revenue generated from this compute is simply "owned" by the citizens. Here is a quick way to approach this problem. There are other mechanisms which can be implemented. The point is we can look beyond labor and/or government transfers. Posted Using INLEO

Sun, 18 Jan 2026 02:09:31 +0000

Post-Labor Economy – Economic Redesign

Automation is radically transforming the economy.

This is not a process that started in the last few years. It is more than half a century of change that is starting to have severe impact.

When we talk about automation, in the economics sense, it is anything that is a labor saving activity. For…Read More

What does the future hold? This is a question that plagued humanity for thousands of years. We all wish we had a crystal ball that was accurate and concise. In spite of this absence, it does not stop us from dusting off the old relic this time of year and seeing what it tells us. That is what I will try to do in this article. What will AI do in 2026? This is, naturally, a very loaded question. Things are moving fast to precise forecasts are impossible. There is really no way to tell what utility AI will provide in another 12 months. We can see the network effects starting to take place. This is something we will focus upon. AI in 2026 What is happening? If we look at the research papers, we see a lot of stuff being worked upon. There are many paths that researchers are going down. Ultimately, I believe none of this matters on an individual scale. For example, Deepseek brought out a paper that potentially is another breakthrough. This company is known for achieving success using smaller parameters compared to the larger model counterparts. This is a reason to give some credence to what Deepseek is doing. Of course, they are far from the only ones innovating. Each week there are dozens of papers detailing what could be the "next path" AI takes. So why do I say that none of this matters at the individual level? My answer lies in the fact that the next big thing is really a totality of smaller breakthroughs. A large portion of the different innovations end up in models such as Claude or Gemini. Eventually, they pull in the hundreds of innovations creating the next advanced model. Therefore, whether it comes from Deepseek, Anthropic, or some college, the flow is into these different models. There is a lot of copycat going on. Here is where we see the network effects. All of this increases utility. Over time, as more is offered, people find use cases for it. General Purpose Technology and the Automation Curve This is why the automation curve is so dangerous. People still contest the impact this will have on jobs. There is a large sector of knowledgeable people who deny jobs will be obliterated. To me, this is countered by simply pointing to network effects. This can be summed up as slowly, slowly, quickly. Network effect in this context deal with utility. It isn't the number of users per se as the utility the models off. As this grows, more is generated, providing the feedback loop. When it comes to automation, nothing happens until it does. Close is not good enough. However, as things get closer and closer, eventually there is the impact of the network effect. With enough utility, things get automated. In the economy, this ultimately means jobs. Will this happen in 2026? I am not going to make that claim. We still could be a couple years away from a major impact. It appears we are in the early stages, with some jobs being lost. That said, we are seeing the proverbial jumping of the gun. Many who were laid off due to AI were rehired. The technology is simply not there yet. That might not be the case by the end of 2026. It is safe to say we will be closer than we are now. Breakthroughs will happen advancing things forward. Grok, Gemini, Claude, and Llama all have major upgrades due. The next generation of these models should propel things ahead. What is the utility? That is still the major question. Models are being upgraded by the applications incorporating the technology still lag. 2026 could be the year we see that change. Grok is being integrated into Tesla. Google is incorporating Gemini in everything it has. Anthropic and OpenAI are partnering with different companies. Llama is open source, available to anyone. The capability of what people have access to will see a marked improvement by the end of the year.

Sat, 10 Jan 2026 10:43:16 +0000

What does the future hold?

This is a question that plagued humanity for thousands of years. We all wish we had a crystal ball that was accurate and concise.

In spite of this absence, it does not stop us from dusting off the old relic this time of year and seeing what it tells us. That is what I will try to do in this article.

What will…Read More

UBI versus UBW With the upcoming AI job apocalypse, many technology people are further discussing how society will look if the overwhelming majority of economic productivity is generated autonomously. How will people live if there are no jobs? It is something that has fostered a number of proposals. At the top of the list if Universal Basic Income (UBI). Actually, this discussion is part of a broader discussion that rarely gets brought up. Most individual focus upon income. This is not what the wealthy do. Take a look at the Forbes 400 list. Is that composed of the highest income earners? The answer is no. Instead, it is the wealthiest people. The metric is net worth. Since we are talking about a new economic model that could be designed for the future, why are we still focusing upon income? It seems habits are hard to change. Source UBI versus UBW Do we want to replicate the same slavery type system? Few can argue that working for a paycheck, the proverbial time for money, is not a form of wage slavery. We see it throughout the developed world. People are paid just enough to keep returning each day. The opportunities to get ahead, for the majority, are limited. Ownership in the economy is not there. When one is a wage earner, the only asset is labor. This is effectively sold, commonly in hourly increments, in return for money. As the wealth builds, whether it is for the company, industry, or country, these individuals benefit none. Their have no assets for the most part. Instead, they are often drowning in debt. Automation is providing the opportunity to create something different. Sadly, many of the ideas being put forth mirror what we already have. Universal Basic Income is still a wage based concept. Even if it isn't "earned", we see how people are still enslaved. How will people pay their bills? The answer is only if the establishment sees fit to pay them. With the recent shutdown of the US government, imagine if the majority of the country was dependent upon the money to survive. Taken one step further, what happens to those who do not agree politically with the party in power? Universal Basic Wealth The entire discussion comes down to a simple premise: who owns the means of production? It is a debate that took place for more than a century. Communism is really nothing more than a breakdown of the economy. Under this system, private ownership is foregone for the public sector. In other words, the government owns the means of production and "distributes" it to best serve society. Of course, when you look at a communist system, it tends to be two-tiered. The equality comes in by making the majority poor. Those at the top do very well, friends of the "party". Capitalism has morphed into corporate ownership. Ironically, this could be viewed as another form of communism. Here the government is not the owner but entities so large the government is basically controlled by them. Tactics such as regulatory capture are commonplace. Friends of whomever is once again part of the game. Politicians are for sale, often retiring with tens of millions of dollars. Under a new system, the same issue will need settling. Who is going to own the means of production? UBI doesn't solve this. It is nothing more than a repeat of what we see. Some entities, in the case probably Big Tech, owns the automation. From there, people will scream for money (income) so, if dire enough, politicians will claim to be helping by extracting (taxing) the production. They will then redistribute the wealth in a manner deemed "fair". Naturally, this will likely be subject to interpretation by the ones in power. The solution is not income but, rather, wealth. People need to own the means of production for a variety of reasons. To achieve this, a system whereby people can have a piece of the economic output which is not dependent upon the grace of others is essential. How do we construct such a system? That is difficult. To me, tokenization is a part of the solution. Here is where people can own a part of the ecosystem, with tokens in a wallet they control. The challenge is to get something like this to merge what what is already produced. Wall Street is not giving up its power. In fact, it is only gaining with each passing year. Crypto, once the mecca for freedom fighters is rapidly being hijacked by major financial firms. UBI is, at best, a starting point. The trust answer lies in some form of wealth distribution. How that is achieved is where the discussion should focus. To me, it is where things need to head in the long run. Posted Using INLEO

Wed, 26 Nov 2025 21:14:30 +0000

UBI versus UBW

With the upcoming AI job apocalypse, many technology people are further discussing how society will look if the overwhelming majority of economic productivity is generated autonomously. How will people live if there are no jobs?

It is something that has fostered a number of proposals. At the top of the list if Universal Basic…Read More

Will We Ever Truly See Decentralization? This is a question that is worthy of consideration. Crypto promised to be the decentralizing force that allowed the world to break away from the banks and create an entirely new monetary system. This was something espoused from the Bitcoin White Paper which discussed the idea of peer-to-peer money. The challenge here was the fact that Bitcoin had some flaws. To start, it does not operate as a valid medium of exchange. As a trading asset, Bitcoin excels. Price stability is nowhere to be found. Then we have the network. Proof-of-work was a breakthrough in that it provided decentralized consensus. We really had not seen that before. Unfortunately, this is failing since we see mining operations growing in size. No longer can people use a PC for this purpose. Expensive hardware drawing large sums of energy are required. In other words, with 40% of mining in the US, the largest chunk of this is done by publicly traded mining companies. These stocks are held by the likes of Blackrock. Hence we seem to be back where we started. Source Will We Ever Truly See Decentralization? There are two components to this discussion. One the one hand, we have the technological capabilities. The issue with decentralization is that it is slower than centralization. Meta can spin something up much quicker than a panel of developers operating independently around the world. Zuckerberg, if he decides, can through resources at a situation and direct people to focus in that direction. A case could be made that decentralized infrastructure lagged behind its centralized counterparts. We can see how quickly Wall Street institutions get their applications online. Once the decision is made to enter something, they move rapidly. For this reason, the basis of decentralization was lagging. Infrastructure is slow to develop. However, the advantage is that, which so much open source, at some point, the compounding starts to take hold. More developers get involved, using existing code to build their platforms or services. Ultimately, this closes the gap to the centralized world. The second component is not as simple. Human Resistance People tend to fight change. I think this is a statement that few would contest. Humans tend to resist anything new that comes along. The majority of the population simply resides in the same "rut" they were in. Basically we are creatures of habit. With the discussion about decentralization, we have to take this into account. Web 3.0 is another transition long promised by the crypto world. The challenge here is that few even think about using these platforms. Instead, the majority who are involved in the topic simply talk about it on Web 2.0 social media platforms. As we enter deeper into the AI world, this is becoming even more prevalent. Big Tech are the beneficiaries of more data along with the continual feed into the vector databases. A platform like X has up-to-the minute info since people are always posting about what is going on. Will this change in the future? This is the crux of the discussion. We will never see decentralization as long as people resist it. In other words, it will only materialize if people opt for it. So far, this is not the case. Solving some of the technical challenges certainly could help. Many are not going to "wrestle" with an application, trying to work around all the bugs. My guess is that we are facing a hard road here. People tend to do what is familiar. Even with something new as crypto, the centralized entities are getting people in the habit of heading to their platforms. Will this change? If it does, we might have an affirmative on the question posed in this article. Posted Using INLEO

Sat, 08 Nov 2025 23:30:58 +0000

Will We Ever Truly See Decentralization?

This is a question that is worthy of consideration.

Crypto promised to be the decentralizing force that allowed the world to break away from the banks and create an entirely new monetary system. This was something espoused from the Bitcoin White Paper which discussed the idea of peer-to-peer…Read More

The Abundance Economy: We Are Seeing It Being Built The abundance economy is before us. This is something that more people are starting to discuss. It is a topic that will garner more interest as time passes, especially with jobs being destroyed. We should start by mentioning there are a number of names floating around for the "new economy" that is being formed. Some call it the "AI economy". Probably a better title is the "Automation economy" because that incorporates more than just the digital. Many ask what happens when the robots take all the jobs? How will people live? Ironically, whether this is the path we are going down is still contested. There are many who espoused the idea that "technology always creates more jobs than it destroys". It is a notion that is not reflected in the data yet is still held onto, primarily among futurists. Source The Abundance Economy: We Are Seeing It Being Built Technology operates on a few curves that are easy to understand. It does seem, however, that most overlook them especially when it comes to the economic impacts. One of the major components of technology is that it is deflationary. Peter Diamandis calls this "demonetization". Technology makes things cheaper. It does so because it makes it easier to product things. We can look at a slew of industries where this was the case. Music, video, information, images (photos), and communications are all part of this. The digital world keeps touching upon many areas, notably knowledge work, where it democratizes it. People debate the deflationary nature of technology, claiming that inflation is the norm. Actually, there are problems with the metrics along with the assumptions of the causes. To start, zero does not factor into the calculations. When something use to have a cost but is now basically free, such as the development of a photo, where is that calculated? We can see the answer. Consider how many industries say this. We use to pay commissions on stock trades. Information once cost money. Movie lovers paid for each video rental. Music albums were costly items. The Union of AI and Robotics AI is just getting started. Actually, the same is true for robotics. The latter will take longer to have an impact since we are dealing with the "world of atoms" along with something that is further behind its digital counterpart. For the moment, we have a tendency to separate these out. That will not be the case in the near future. Ai is going to be integrated into all physical items, turning them "smart". Language models are the first phase of this process. The narrative centers around the idea of "real world AI". Here again, we can use a couple different terms. Some prefer the concept of "spatial AI" to denote the entry (and understanding) of the physical world. This is where robots enter the picture. Understanding exponentials is crucial. Obviously, manufacturing takes time, operating at a much slower pace than the online (digital) realm. We are still in the prototyping stage of humanoid robots. Once they enter production, it will be a multi-year process of scaling. This means we are looking at some time before the numbers are such where the economic impact is widely felt. That said, once the penetration into the real world starts, we can see how the deflationary nature takes over. Simply focus upon the different levels of the supply chain and notice how automation will impact that. Since we have products that factor into others, we can see the entire "stepping up" pattern. The impact is felt all the way up, until we see the end product. Labor is one of the largest costs to businesses. Here is where automation blasts the currency economic paradigm. Of course, there will be fallout, something that few leaders have taken the time to seriously discuss. The path over the last few years with AI showed us what is unfolding. We had a number of obstacles mentioned which were overcome. At first it was GPUs. Then data. Next was transformers. Now we are onto energy (electricity). With each obstacle, solutions were presented which moved us past it. At present, transformers and energy still are in the crosshairs. However, give it a few years and we will likely see solutions that alleviate these situations. Economic output is going to explode in the 2030s. This is where abundance, across much of the industrial spectrum will be the norm. It will likely take a couple billion robots before this is noticeable but it is coming. The only question is how soon do we see viable humanoids that are ready for mass production? Posted Using INLEO #robots#abundance#ai#humanoid#economy#output#mancave

Thu, 06 Nov 2025 21:58:17 +0000

The Abundance Economy: We Are Seeing It Being Built

The abundance economy is before us.

This is something that more people are starting to discuss. It is a topic that will garner more interest as time passes, especially with jobs being destroyed.

We should start by mentioning there are a number of names floating around for the “new…Read More

Crypto Is Built For Machines taskmaster4450 (85)in LeoFinance • 2 hours ago "The robots are coming." This is a phrase that many are uttering. With the advancements in robotics, especially humanoid, it is easy to see how this could be a reality by the end of the decade. By that time, it is possible that we see tens of millions of humanoid robots built globally each year. This will feed into the labor pool, helping to bring about a new economic era. What this will look like, exactly, is hard to guess. Things get more convoluted when we add in the fact that "digital robots", i.e. AI agents, will be plentiful. One of the fundamental premises of this is the fact that automation is increasing. These will operate without direct human interaction. Obviously, there will be programing and updates. The basic functionality, will be unsupervised. If the machines are part of the economy, they will require the ability to conduct financial transactions. Here is where the innovation over the last 15 years comes in. Image generated by Grok Crypto Is Built For Machines Can you see a humanoid robot walking into a bank and opening up an account? Along the same lines, imagine it trying to do that online. If we think about the questions asked, they are impossible for a robot to answer. Naturally, we could see things altered to accommodate this but it would be a monumental task. We are dealing with a world that is becoming less dependent upon physical location. How are government regulations going to be drawn up? This is the major task confronting governments all over the world. To me, this is a fool's errand, one they will pursue until it is time to give up. Think back to the early days of file sharing and how they tried to combat the distribution of music files. A lot of what governments are grappling with will likely fall into the same category. Getting back to the robots, AI, and finance, this is where blockchain is valuable. We already see the basic components for automated entities to operate. Autonomous Transactions Cryptocurrency is ideally suited to handle autonomous transactions. In fact, we see this happening all over the world. The basic infrastructure of blockchain networks already has this at its core. Let us look at the structure. A node is set up and validates blocks. This is done based upon the requirements of the network. For Bitcoin, a node much solve a complex mathematical problem, thus earning the block reward. Other systems may utilize a rotating schedule based upon staking. Whatever the format, nodes produce blocks, adding to the chain. This is done on consistent time intervals, again dictated by the network coding. Once a block is added, that node receives the payout. The reason this happens is each node is tied to a wallet on that network. When a payout is due, the system knows exactly where to send it. No human interaction is required. The entire process is autonomous. This is the future in action. At this moment, there are probably hundreds of thousands of nodes globally tied to different blockchain networks that run in this manner. Here we see a prime example of how machines are running things. No humans run the networks. Code changes and updates are generated by human developers but, once sent out, the machines keep things running. The other point is the totality of the network. Even if one takes the node down, the system keeps churning out blocks as the other nodes step in. Nodes can enter or exit the system without issue as the coding allows for the addition and removal to the process. Friction Removal Again, consider what happens if a bank is involved. Under the present system, an individual (or group) can set up a node. This is done by getting access to the proper hardware, loading the software, and setting up an account. The last part is really nothing more than having a wallet. Once the node is activated and the wallet connected, operation can commence. Now imagine if this occurred 10 times per day. Contrast this with a bank. Each node operator would have to set up a bank account, providing documentation. Since a computer (or robot) cannot have an account, this would be in the name of a company or individual. That information would have to be tied to the node, with a path for conversion from the base layer coin to the bank's currency. Rinse and repeat this 10x per day. The friction is evident. With a crypto network, the garnering of a wallet could take a few second (to minutes). Once issued, it is ready for action. In addition to removal of intermediaries, this can be tied to smart contracts that can dictate the authority the machine has. For example, there might be a limit to what can be sent from the wallet. This could be spelled out in a contract. We also could see other wallets requiring whitelisting to receive funding, something that might (or might not) have human oversight. Automation is going to be the norm. Because of this, a monetary system to facilitate the economic activity is required. This is not going to be the traditional financial system. The answer is crypto. After all, this was built for machines, being developed in the digital world. Posted Using INLEO #crypto#robots#aiagent#monetarysystem#machines#automation#mancave#neoxian#proofofbrain 2 hours ago in LeoFinance by taskmaster4450 (85)$20.61 545 votes Reply 3 Sort: Trending [-]omarrojas (74) 2 hours ago Very interesting, robots are coming, to help the world, especially the business world and housewives as well. Success in your publication. https://inleo.io/threads/view/omarrojas/re-leothreads-2oymdyy8s?referral=omarrojas $0.00Reply [-]elias22 (55) 1 hour ago I think traditional financial systems should recognize the digital world and evolve themselves. It reminds me of Nokia when it initially refused to adapt to the times and develop touch screens, which made it sink in the mud. The same applies to traditional financial systems. $0.00Reply [-]revolverocelotyt (59) 36 minutes ago Even though human monitoring is still important but maybe in the future that will change significantly. $0.00Reply

Wed, 05 Mar 2025 16:35:53 +0000

Crypto Is Built For Machines
taskmaster4450 (85)in LeoFinance • 2 hours ago
“The robots are coming.”

This is a phrase that many are uttering. With the advancements in robotics, especially humanoid, it is easy to see how this could be a reality by the end of the decade. By that time, it is possible that we see tens of millions of humanoid r…Read More