“America right now is a giant bet on AI.”  The line isn’t hyperbole — it’s a diagnosis. Nearly every major market narrative, from cloud contracts to chip supply“America right now is a giant bet on AI.”  The line isn’t hyperbole — it’s a diagnosis. Nearly every major market narrative, from cloud contracts to chip supply

America’s Giant Bet on AI

5 min read

“America right now is a giant bet on AI.” 

The line isn’t hyperbole — it’s a diagnosis. Nearly every major market narrative, from cloud contracts to chip supply deals, is now priced as if artificial intelligence is inevitable, infinite, and immune to gravity. 

The problem is that some of the biggest bets are beginning to look circular. 

The New Loop 

AMD and OpenAI recently announced a multi-year agreement that, at first glance, looks like a masterstroke. AMD will deliver up to six gigawatts of its forthcoming Instinct MI450 GPUs to OpenAI — beginning with one gigawatt in the second half of 2026 — and OpenAI has the right to purchase up to 10% of AMD through warrants tied to that deployment.  

Oracle, meanwhile, will deploy 50,000 MI450 GPUs on its cloud starting in Q3 2026, creating one of the world’s largest AI superclusters to serve OpenAI and others.  

It’s a trilogy of mutually reinforcing promises. OpenAI’s projected demand justifies Oracle’s expansion. Oracle’s expansion validates AMD’s production. AMD’s supply confirms OpenAI’s growth. On paper, everyone wins. In practice, the same future dollar is counted three times — once as OpenAI’s commitment, once as Oracle’s backlog, and once as AMD’s booked demand.  

This is how a market becomes a feedback loop. 

 The Physical Cost of Optimism   

What makes this moment different from previous tech cycles is the sheer physicality of AI expansion. Every “bet” now includes new data centers, electrical infrastructure, and chip supply chains measured not in servers but in gigawatts. Global electricity use from data centers is expected to double by 2030, with AI workloads driving a significant share of that growth.  

The long-term impact isn’t just financial—it’s environmental and geopolitical as well. When bets are denominated in power grids rather than pixels, the consequences of over-building become harder to unwind. 

Echoes of AOL 

If this feels familiar, it should. In the late 1990s, AOL bought ads on sites that, in turn, bought ads on AOL. The illusion of infinite growth was built on reciprocal transactions that appeared to be revenue but weren’t. The structure wasn’t fraudulent — it was self-referential. When confidence cracked, the entire illusion evaporated. 

AI’s version is bigger, faster, and more physical. Instead of ad slots, the assets are data centers, chip fabrication, and gigawatts of energy capacity. When these circular deals stumble, the shock won’t be confined to valuations — it will hit supply chains, energy grids, and capital budgets. 

Why This Cycle is Harder to Unwind   

The dot-com boom was built on digital illusions—page views, clicks, banner ads. When valuations collapsed, the physical cost was relatively low.  

Today’s AI boom is anchored in fabs, foundries, server farms, and energy contracts that last for decades. Even if demand slows, the sunk costs remain. That doesn’t mean collapse is inevitable, but it does mean the exit ramps are narrower than they were in 2000. When infrastructure becomes a speculative asset, bubbles take longer to inflate—and longer to deflate.  

As Michael Porter argued in Harvard Business Review during the dot-com boom, periods of intense technological enthusiasm often encourage companies to chase scale before proving sustainable economics—a lesson that feels increasingly relevant in today’s AI cycle.  

Faith as Collateral 

None of these companies are behaving irrationally. They’re doing what markets reward: scaling into optimism. Oracle is chasing relevance, AMD is chasing Nvidia, and OpenAI is chasing infinity. But all three depend on each other’s projections. If OpenAI’s monetization falters, Oracle’s backlog weakens, AMD’s production run slows — and Wall Street’s AI narrative starts to fold in on itself. 

This isn’t fraud; it’s leverage masquerading as progress. The same optimism circulates until it becomes collateral. 

Leverage in Disguise  

Much of this expansion is being financed through multi-year cloud agreements, chip-capacity contracts, and long-duration capital spending. These commitments make perfect sense individually, but collectively they embed leverage deep into the supply chain. If OpenAI slows spending or shifts platforms, suddenly Oracle’s utilization forecasts change, which then cascades into AMD’s manufacturing pipeline. AI’s growth is real, but the financing structures assume a straight line into the future. As we learned in past cycles, demand rarely behaves linearly when credit, optimism, and competition collide.  

When one chip fails, or one forecast slips, the loop collapses like a château de cartes. These aren’t intangible apps that can be quietly sunset. Billions are already committed to physical infrastructure. Factories are being built. Power contracts are being signed. The AI economy is as material as the steel that holds its racks — and that’s what makes the risk systemic. 

AI will change the world. Of that, there’s no doubt. But we may have put the cart before the horse, building industrial-scale supply chains for demand that’s still theoretical. Wall Street has seen this movie before: it was called the internet bubble. The sequel has a bigger budget and higher stakes. 

America’s Bet 

America’s genius has always been its willingness to bet big. But this time, the chips are literal, and the loop is tight. The circular deals between Oracle, AMD, and OpenAI are dazzling feats of engineering and narrative — a system in which everyone funds everyone else’s future. 

It works — until it doesn’t. 

History rarely repeats exactly, but it often rhymes. In the 1990s, the illusion was that clicks equaled value. Today, it’s that computing equals destiny. Both were stories built on faith. 

And faith, as every investor eventually learns, is the most volatile asset of all. 

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.
Tags:

You May Also Like

Shocking OpenVPP Partnership Claim Draws Urgent Scrutiny

Shocking OpenVPP Partnership Claim Draws Urgent Scrutiny

The post Shocking OpenVPP Partnership Claim Draws Urgent Scrutiny appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. The cryptocurrency world is buzzing with a recent controversy surrounding a bold OpenVPP partnership claim. This week, OpenVPP (OVPP) announced what it presented as a significant collaboration with the U.S. government in the innovative field of energy tokenization. However, this claim quickly drew the sharp eye of on-chain analyst ZachXBT, who highlighted a swift and official rebuttal that has sent ripples through the digital asset community. What Sparked the OpenVPP Partnership Claim Controversy? The core of the issue revolves around OpenVPP’s assertion of a U.S. government partnership. This kind of collaboration would typically be a monumental endorsement for any private cryptocurrency project, especially given the current regulatory climate. Such a partnership could signify a new era of mainstream adoption and legitimacy for energy tokenization initiatives. OpenVPP initially claimed cooperation with the U.S. government. This alleged partnership was said to be in the domain of energy tokenization. The announcement generated considerable interest and discussion online. ZachXBT, known for his diligent on-chain investigations, was quick to flag the development. He brought attention to the fact that U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Commissioner Hester Peirce had directly addressed the OpenVPP partnership claim. Her response, delivered within hours, was unequivocal and starkly contradicted OpenVPP’s narrative. How Did Regulatory Authorities Respond to the OpenVPP Partnership Claim? Commissioner Hester Peirce’s statement was a crucial turning point in this unfolding story. She clearly stated that the SEC, as an agency, does not engage in partnerships with private cryptocurrency projects. This response effectively dismantled the credibility of OpenVPP’s initial announcement regarding their supposed government collaboration. Peirce’s swift clarification underscores a fundamental principle of regulatory bodies: maintaining impartiality and avoiding endorsements of private entities. Her statement serves as a vital reminder to the crypto community about the official stance of government agencies concerning private ventures. Moreover, ZachXBT’s analysis…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 02:13
United States Building Permits Change dipped from previous -2.8% to -3.7% in August

United States Building Permits Change dipped from previous -2.8% to -3.7% in August

The post United States Building Permits Change dipped from previous -2.8% to -3.7% in August appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Information on these pages contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Markets and instruments profiled on this page are for informational purposes only and should not in any way come across as a recommendation to buy or sell in these assets. You should do your own thorough research before making any investment decisions. FXStreet does not in any way guarantee that this information is free from mistakes, errors, or material misstatements. It also does not guarantee that this information is of a timely nature. Investing in Open Markets involves a great deal of risk, including the loss of all or a portion of your investment, as well as emotional distress. All risks, losses and costs associated with investing, including total loss of principal, are your responsibility. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of FXStreet nor its advertisers. The author will not be held responsible for information that is found at the end of links posted on this page. If not otherwise explicitly mentioned in the body of the article, at the time of writing, the author has no position in any stock mentioned in this article and no business relationship with any company mentioned. The author has not received compensation for writing this article, other than from FXStreet. FXStreet and the author do not provide personalized recommendations. The author makes no representations as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability of this information. FXStreet and the author will not be liable for any errors, omissions or any losses, injuries or damages arising from this information and its display or use. Errors and omissions excepted. The author and FXStreet are not registered investment advisors and nothing in this article is intended…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 02:20
CME Group to launch Solana and XRP futures options in October

CME Group to launch Solana and XRP futures options in October

The post CME Group to launch Solana and XRP futures options in October appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. CME Group is preparing to launch options on SOL and XRP futures next month, giving traders new ways to manage exposure to the two assets.  The contracts are set to go live on October 13, pending regulatory approval, and will come in both standard and micro sizes with expiries offered daily, monthly and quarterly. The new listings mark a major step for CME, which first brought bitcoin futures to market in 2017 and added ether contracts in 2021. Solana and XRP futures have quickly gained traction since their debut earlier this year. CME says more than 540,000 Solana contracts (worth about $22.3 billion), and 370,000 XRP contracts (worth $16.2 billion), have already been traded. Both products hit record trading activity and open interest in August. Market makers including Cumberland and FalconX plan to support the new contracts, arguing that institutional investors want hedging tools beyond bitcoin and ether. CME’s move also highlights the growing demand for regulated ways to access a broader set of digital assets. The launch, which still needs the green light from regulators, follows the end of XRP’s years-long legal fight with the US Securities and Exchange Commission. A federal court ruling in 2023 found that institutional sales of XRP violated securities laws, but programmatic exchange sales did not. The case officially closed in August 2025 after Ripple agreed to pay a $125 million fine, removing one of the biggest uncertainties hanging over the token. This is a developing story. This article was generated with the assistance of AI and reviewed by editor Jeffrey Albus before publication. Get the news in your inbox. Explore Blockworks newsletters: Source: https://blockworks.co/news/cme-group-solana-xrp-futures
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/17 23:55