A stock market boom in artificial intelligence companies has added more than half a trillion dollars to the wealth of America’s tech barons in the past year, data shows.

The top 10 US founders and bosses of some of the world’s largest technology companies saw their finances swell to nearly $2.5tn, up from $1.9tn, in the year to Christmas Eve, according to figures from Bloomberg.

Elon Musk, already the world’s richest man, has again proved to be one of biggest winners as the AI gold-rush has pushed US stock markets to record highs.

Musk’s net worth increased by nearly 50% year-on-year to $645bn. The tycoon, whose business interests include xAI, an artificial intelligence company, became the first person to have a net-worth of more than $500bn in October this year. He could become the world’s first trillionaire if he hits targets set by Tesla, the electric car company he runs.

Musk sits ahead of Google co-founder Larry Page and Amazon founder Jeff Bezos in the overall rankings of the world’s wealthiest billionaires. Page is estimated to be worth $270bn, and Bezos $255bn.

    • Ancalagon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      13 hours ago

      … How is everyone so dense. They sell your information and you are the product. And the best part is they can say they don’t because they are not making a profit.

      They sell all of your information.

      • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        13 hours ago

        I don’t even know who is paying for most of it, to be honest. I know some people that buy an LLM subscription. I know companies will pay for per-seat licenses to things like Copilot.

        But I see LLM use in Duckduckgo. I see it jammed into every product we are already paying for at work - MS stuff, Slack, hell, I lost track of all the places where some AI bubble has popped up saying how X product has added AI to help me summarize things. But who is really paying extra for any of that?

        And don’t get me started on how I can download and run various models via Ollama or the like on even older GPU(s) and get decent performance for a lot of problems, all without handing over a CC# to someone, along with all my data for them to mine.

        • Ancalagon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Let me put it this way. I can add AI to harvest everything you do and like you said inject it everywhere because people still think it’s benign. The royal Navy just launched autonomous drones with AI.

          They are creating a culling ecosystem where the few will have control over the many via technology.

        • HellsBelle@sh.itjust.worksOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 hours ago

          My 87 yr old landlord had looked up some info the other day. I looked over her shoulder and saw she was reading it from DDGs AI bubble, so then had to explain why she shouldn’t do that anymore.

  • CandyPants@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Yeah on paper. I can’t tell you anyone that I know who is paying for AI. The company I work for does have a Chatgpt subscirption. So i guess thats one.

    My point is that we keep hearing about the AI spending, but im not noticing anyone who is paying or even enthusiastic about AI. Its a corporate buzzword and C suites dont understand it yet.

    Yet it accounts for 60-70 percent of the growth in the US markets. Does anyone want to take a guess at how this AI boom is gonna end?

    This is the most predictable house of cards ever.

    • Tollana1234567@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      they are trying to make business hop on it, so they are left holding the bag, in the end we will probably see even more layoffs than now.

      • CandyPants@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        Thats been the game for years. I don’t think thats enough to offset the cost of electricity. I think their goal was to sell AI to business to replace workers. The problem is that it cant YET.

        Eventually it will get good enough to replace some entry level folks, but this whole thing is one great big fucking swindle. When it does start to unravel everyone is going look back and see how obvious it was in hindsight.

        • Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 hours ago

          You’re right that it can’t reliably replace workers yet, but that’s not stopping companies from doing it anyway. For example, try to reach a human customer service rep at any large company.

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Wealth is finite.

    They didn’t “add” money, no one can.

    They redistributed it.

    Half a trillion dollars to a handful of billionaires, from everyone else.

    Call it what it is.

    • kn33@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Wealth is finite.

      Well, no. Work increases the value of material. Someone will pay more for a calzone than for its ingredients. More value, when distributed, becomes wealth.

      That’s not what’s going on here. The value is all speculative and fake. But wealth is able to be created.

      • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        20 hours ago

        Yes and to add to that, wealth is always created by labour, it is only redistributed via ownership.

        All investors just give labourers access to resources, it’s needed cause they hoard the resources and keep them scarce so they can leverage them for more.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Someone will pay more for a calzone than for its ingredients. More value, when distributed, becomes wealth.

        Bro…

        Do you have a magic pocket that makes money whenever you want a calzone?

        Because that’s pretty cool.

        In the real world no wealth is created. Some was moved from the calzone maker to the store for ingredients, then some other people paid more for a calzone than ingredients cost.

        No wealth was created, it was redistributed.

        If you spent $2 on ingredients and sold a calzone for $5, somebody just paid you $3 of their own dollars for you to do it.

        How the fuck did sonmany people up otw you for just completly missing the point?

    • gedaliyah@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      20 hours ago

      Yes, we are still trading on the same five acorns that were originally used as currency. /s

      Yes, most of the wealth here is stolen, but the statement that wealth is zero-sum is absurdly inaccurate.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        13 hours ago

        You think more physical representation of money means more wealth?

        Like, would you trade a $20 for 5 nickles since it’s a 5 for 1 trade?

        They print paper money, but that doesn’t create more wealth, it makes paper money worth less…

        Which is called “inflation” and requires for our exonomy to kind of function…

        • realitaetsverlust@piefed.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 hours ago

          That’s not how wealth works. Wealth is not a representation of money, but money is a representation of wealth. Printing money doesn’t create wealth, it just makes the representation of wealth worth less. The implication that wealth has to be “taken away” from something or someone is just straightup wrong because that would imply the world has not gained any wealth ever, which would be a stupid assumption. Wealth is created by work and innovation - that’s why the materials inside a smartphone are worth significantly less than the entire smartphone.

    • StinkyFingerItchyBum@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      There is no value added, only an inflated $ value and malprovisioned funds. Everyone is worse off, but the rich who’s bank accounts go brrrrr faster than the world enshittifies.

  • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    20 hours ago

    The debate used to be:

    Should we let rich people exist if they produce great products.

    Now the second part isn’t true anymore, but to be fair, those who understand capitalism knew this was always the endgame.

    I’m very disappointed this cyberpunk dystopia doesn’t have the cool gadgets to match, at least let me have that.

  • P1nkman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    22 hours ago

    THE PLANET OWNS ITSELF MONEY, IN THE TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS, AND YET, WE MAKE MORE? EEAT THE RICH!

  • gedaliyah@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Somehow I feel like they will be fine when the bottom drops out and ordinary people will be the ones who pay.