AI Insights
Wall Street’s Battle With Which Road to Take

As investments in artificial intelligence continue to soar, some analysts are raising alarms about a looming bubble that could burst and trigger broader market declines. Others, however, say they’ve never been so sure that it is a growing opportunity.
So who is right? Well, on Wall Street, there’s a pick-your-flavor opinion for whatever it is you want to back, so we can’t determine that. But we can show you what each side is thinking.
Firstly, that the sector is overvalued. Analysts and investors and even company CEOs of AI giants have expressed concerns that current valuations of AI-related stocks may be disconnected from their underlying fundamentals.
The rapid rally in companies involved in AI hardware, software, and infrastructure—including chipmakers, cloud providers, and automation firms—has driven valuations to levels that many consider unsustainable.
Why does that matter? Because everything that goes up must eventually come down.
That means that recent market volatility and warnings from veteran investors suggest that a sudden reassessment of valuations could result in a significant downturn, similar to past technology and internet bubbles.
The hype men
Secondly, that growth is why those valuations are worth it.
Despite recent concerns about overvaluation and a possible slowdown in AI-related growth, UBS analysts reaffirmed their positive outlook on the sector this week, buoyed by Nvidia’s hotly anticipated quarterly results.
In a note released after Nvidia reported earnings that exceeded expectations (but only just barely), UBS said that the core case for AI investment remains intact.
“While valuations might appear stretched in the short term, the fundamental need for AI technology across industries continues to grow,” UBS wrote in a note to investors.
The firm highlighted Nvidia’s role as a leader in semiconductor and AI infrastructure, emphasizing that the company’s robust revenue growth, which is projected at 48% for the current quarter, is a sign for ongoing demand for AI hardware and software solutions.
Analysts also pointed out that the broader enterprise move toward integrating AI is supported by increasing capital spending, which bodes well for the sector’s long-term prospects.
“Investors should maintain conviction,” UBS added, “as the demand for scalable, high-performance AI platforms is only poised to accelerate.”
Market experts agree that while short-term volatility is inevitable, the fundamental structural drivers, such as the adoption of AI in cloud computing, autonomous vehicles, and enterprise AI, suggest the sector’s growth story remains robust for the foreseeable future.
The haters
Not everyone is as bullish on AI as UBS.
Take OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, a man who is watching billions of dollars being poured into his competitors. Altman caused a major market rout when he said that investors are getting “over-excited” about AI.
“Are we in a phase where investors as a whole are over-excited about AI? My opinion is yes. Is AI the most important thing to happen in a very long time? My opinion is also yes,” He told The Verge, adding that he thinks that some valuations of AI start-ups are “insane” and “not rational”.
Investors are also increasingly wary after reports that Meta is considering a “downsizing” of its artificial intelligence division, with some executives expected to depart.
This potential shift marks a notable departure from Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s recent heavy investments in transforming the company’s AI operations.
Over the past few months, Zuckerberg has championed a major overhaul of Meta’s AI strategy, emphasizing its critical role in enhancing user experience and competing with rivals like OpenAI and Google.
The New York Times cited sources close to the company, indicating that the restructuring could lead to significant layoffs or a shakeup in leadership.
The planned changes have raised questions among market watchers about whether Meta’s aggressive AI ambitions are being reassessed, or if internal challenges are forcing a strategic pivot. The move signals a period of uncertainty for Meta’s AI efforts, which had been a key part of Zuckerberg’s vision for the company’s future growth
So full speed ahead or hit the brakes?
While some experts acknowledge the transformative potential of AI, they caution investors to remain vigilant and avoid chasing speculative gains that lack proper valuation.
“The risk is that we are in a man-made bubble that will eventually burst, causing widespread damage,” said industry veteran Michael Johnson.
“Even when the dotcom bubble burst, there were a handful of fairly obvious winners that eventually came roaring back,” said CNBC‘s Jim Cramer. “If you gave up on Amazon in 2001, you missed the $2 trillion (£1.4 trillion) boat.”
Cramer has been investigated by the Securities and Exchange Commission at least once, and has also drawn criticism for past comments on market manipulation.
AI Insights
Metal Gear Solid back with remake years after Kojima left Konami

Tom GerkenTechnology reporter

Metal Gear is one of the best-selling video game series in history, shifting more than 60 million copies.
The series pioneered cinematics in gaming by blending cutting-edge cutscenes, voice acting and dynamic camera angles to create something that would have looked more at home on the big screen at the time.
Metal Gear tackled themes not commonly seen in games, such as nuclear disarmament and child soldiers, and posed philosophical questions while also leveraging offbeat humour.
The games would often break the fourth wall and ask players to find solutions to puzzles in unusual ways – such as looking on the back cover of the game’s physical box.
The series’ significant place in gaming history meant fans were stunned when its creator Hideo Kojima quit game publisher Konami in an acrimonious split in 2015.
One of gaming’s biggest titles was left directionless – and there’s been no game in the best-selling series since.
But now, a decade later, Konami has released a remake of the third game in the series: Metal Gear Solid Delta.
So what happened between Konami and Kojima, and how does the new game hold up without its original creator?
Why did Kojima leave Konami?
“The impact Metal Gear has had on game-making makes it one of the most heralded entertainment franchises in the world, and made Hideo Kojima one of the industry’s most famous creators,” industry expert Christopher Dring told the BBC.
With such success, you might think it was a match made in heaven, but there were issues bubbling under the surface.
While nothing has been said publicly, one generally accepted theory behind the split relates to the spiralling cost of 2015’s Metal Gear Solid V, estimated by some at more than $80m (£59m) – a very significant development cost at the time.
It is not known exactly what happened between Konami and Kojima, but the studio was clearly fed up with the amount of money he was spending to make a single game – with Kojima’s internal studio actually removed from promotional materials for Metal Gear Solid V at the time.
Konami got the game out the door, but it seemed to be scaled back from its original vision despite the high cost, with repeated levels and a third chapter that never emerged.
Even so, the game still received excellent reviews and won several awards, but the rift between company and creator seemed unfixable.
And in an act that proved highly controversial – and perhaps shows how heated things had become behind the scenes – when Metal Gear Solid V won an award, Konami informed the developer he was not allowed to collect it.

A few months later, Kojima was gone, and in the years that followed, his former studio pivoted.
“Konami shifted its strategy for a while, away from console games, and focused its efforts on the amusements markets, things like pachinko machines,” Mr Dring said.
“They also focused increasingly on mobile.”
It meant Konami’s other classic franchises like Castlevania and Silent Hill also went without new games for a decade.
Meanwhile, Kojima’s new studio signed a blockbuster deal with Sony to develop the monster hit Death Stranding for PlayStation, followed by a sequel this year.
Why a remake now?
Gaming has pivoted towards remakes in recent years.
High-profile games like Resident Evil 4, Final Fantasy VII and Demon’s Souls, all classics in their day, have been remade with the benefits of modern graphics and game design to big fanfare – and strong sales figures.
“It’s a hugely lucrative and growing sector,” said Mr Dring.
“The industry is getting older, gamers are entering middle age and are nostalgic for classic titles.
Mr Drings points out that one of the best-selling games of the year so far is Elder Scrolls V: Oblivion Remastered, a remake of a classic Role-Playing Game (RPG) from 2007, selling millions of copies since its release in April.
Konami has begun a return to publishing games by focusing in this area, with a Silent Hill remake coming last year and a new Survival Kids game released earlier in 2025.
So it is a potentially lucrative move – but is Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater the right game to remake?

Fans of the series told the BBC Metal Gear Solid 3 was chosen for good reason.
YouTuber Zak Ras said there was “immense significance” behind the game.
“Most people will say their favourite entry to the series is either Metal Gear Solid 1 or 3,” he said.
“Story-wise, given that it’s the first prequel set at the very beginning of the series timeline, it’s one of the few entries you can go into completely blind with absolutely no required knowledge of the series, other than very first Metal Gear from 1987.”
Ras said Metal Gear Solid 3 struck a good balance between gameplay and cinematic storytelling, making it a good choice for people who have never played a game in the series before.
For example, the game opens with an introduction heavily influenced by James Bond films, meaning new fans are eased into the series’ weirder elements.
And the brothers behind PythonSelkan Studios – known as Python & Selkan to their 122,000 YouTube subscribers – agreed.
“Completing the game was an incredible experience in itself,” they said. “Snake Eater’s gut-wrenching ending is what stood out most, leaving an impact on us that no other game had ever left before.”
“This game holds a special place in our hearts,” they added.
Metal Gear without Kojima
The brothers said, as lifelong fans of the series, they were “incredibly excited” by the announcement.
The pair are currently playing the remake, and have been “very impressed” by its improved graphics and audio.
They described the game as a “truly a faithful recreation”, adding that it improved “the essence of the original without changing its fundamental structure”.

So far so good for Metal Gear Solid without Hideo Kojima – which Ras put down to the game being true to the original.
One example he highlights is that the voice performances have been kept the same, and players can choose whether to use the original control scheme or a more modern take.
“There’s no doubt it is Kojima’s directorial ‘genes’ that are being dominantly expressed here,” he said.
“Kojima expressed a desire to move on from Metal Gear since as early as MGS2 and leave the series in the hands of others to continue.
“It may have taken him another 14 years and five director credits for that to happen, but it is now reality.”
And however the remake fares with fans, one household won’t be picking up a new copy – Kojima himself has laughed off the suggestion that he would play the new game.

AI Insights
Bitcoin Proxy’s Chief Seeks Funding Fix as ‘Flywheel’ Falters

Simon Gerovich, who turned a struggling Japanese hotelier into a Bitcoin stockpiler and investor darling, is feeling the heat.
Source link
AI Insights
Anthropic Settles Landmark Artificial Intelligence Copyright Case

Anthropic’s settlement came after a mixed ruling on the “fair use” where it potentially faced massive piracy damages for downloading millions of books illegally. The settlement seems to clarify an important principle: how AI companies acquire data matters as much as what they do with it.
After warning both the district court and an appeals court that the potential pursuit of hundreds of billions of dollars in statutory damages created a “death knell” situation that would force an unfair settlement, Anthropic has settled its closely watched copyright lawsuit with authors whose books were allegedly pirated for use in Anthropic’s training data. Anthropic’s settlement this week in a landmark copyright case may signal how the industry will navigate the dozens of similar lawsuits pending nationwide. While settlement details remain confidential pending court approval, the timing reveals essential lessons for AI development and intellectual property law.
The settlement follows Judge William Alsup’s nuanced ruling that using copyrighted materials to train AI models constitutes transformative fair use (essentially, using copyrighted material in a new way that doesn’t compete with the original) — a victory for AI developers. The court held that AI models are “like any reader aspiring to be a writer” who trains upon works “not to race ahead and replicate or supplant them — but to turn a hard corner and create something different.”
(For readers unfamiliar with copyright law, “fair use” is a legal doctrine that allows limited use of copyrighted material without permission for purposes like criticism, comment, or — as courts are now determining — AI training. A key test is whether the new use “transforms” the original work by adding something new or serving a different purpose, rather than simply copying it. Think of it as the difference between a critic quoting a novel to review it versus someone photocopying the entire book to avoid buying it.)
After ruling in Anthropic’s favor on this issue, Judge Alsup drew a bright line at acquisition methods. Anthropic’s downloading of over seven million books from pirate sites like LibGen constituted infringement, the judge ruled, rejecting Anthropic’s “research purpose” defense: “You can’t just bless yourself by saying I have a research purpose and, therefore, go and take any textbook you want.”
The settlement’s timing suggests a pragmatic approach to risk management. While Anthropic could claim vindication on training methodology, defending its acquisition methods before a jury posed substantial financial exposure. Statutory damages for willful infringement can reach $150,000 per work, creating potential liability for Anthropic totaling in the billions.
Anthropic is still facing copyright suits from music publishers, including Universal Music Corp. and Concord Music Group Inc., as well as Reddit. The settlement with authors removes one of Anthropic’s many legal challenges. Lawyers for the plaintiffs said, “[t]his historic settlement will benefit all class members,” promising to announce details in the coming weeks.
This settlement solidifies the principles established in Judge Alsup’s prior ruling: how AI companies acquire training data matters as much as what they do with it. The court’s framework permits AI systems to learn from human cultural output, but only through legitimate channels.
For practitioners advising AI projects and companies, the lesson is straightforward: document data sources meticulously and ensure the legitimate acquisition of data. AI companies that previously relied on scraped or pirated content face strong incentives to negotiate licensing agreements or develop alternative training approaches. Publishers and authors gain leverage to demand compensation, even as the fair use doctrine limits their ability to block AI training entirely.
The Anthropic settlement marks neither a total victory nor a defeat for either side, but rather a recognition of the complex realities governing AI and intellectual property. It also remains to be seen what impact it will have on similar pending cases, including whether this will create a pattern of AI companies settling when facing potential class actions. In this new landscape, the legitimacy of the process matters as much as the innovation of the outcome. That balance will define the next chapter of AI development. Under Anthropic, it is apparent that to maximize chances of AI models constituting fair use, developers should use a bookstore, not a pirate’s flag.
-
Tools & Platforms3 weeks ago
Building Trust in Military AI Starts with Opening the Black Box – War on the Rocks
-
Ethics & Policy1 month ago
SDAIA Supports Saudi Arabia’s Leadership in Shaping Global AI Ethics, Policy, and Research – وكالة الأنباء السعودية
-
Events & Conferences3 months ago
Journey to 1000 models: Scaling Instagram’s recommendation system
-
Jobs & Careers2 months ago
Mumbai-based Perplexity Alternative Has 60k+ Users Without Funding
-
Business1 day ago
The Guardian view on Trump and the Fed: independence is no substitute for accountability | Editorial
-
Funding & Business2 months ago
Kayak and Expedia race to build AI travel agents that turn social posts into itineraries
-
Education2 months ago
VEX Robotics launches AI-powered classroom robotics system
-
Podcasts & Talks2 months ago
Happy 4th of July! 🎆 Made with Veo 3 in Gemini
-
Podcasts & Talks2 months ago
OpenAI 🤝 @teamganassi
-
Jobs & Careers2 months ago
Astrophel Aerospace Raises ₹6.84 Crore to Build Reusable Launch Vehicle