Martin Armstrong #1495

Michael Farris (0:00)

What's up, everybody? Just want to let people know, provide a quick update, that all of my conversations go on Substack, both video and audio, ad-free, early.

So if you like what I'm doing, want to support my work, please consider becoming a paid subscriber, and you can listen early and ad-free. Also, I've been getting some requests about, can you still listen on Apple, Spotify, and other platforms? Once you become a paid subscriber on Substack, it'll provide you an RSS feed. You can then take that link, and then listen to it on all those platforms as well, ad-free. So I appreciate all your support, and thank you very much. On this episode of Coffee and a Mike, Martin Armstrong is an internationally recognized economist, former hedge fund manager, the founder of AE Global Solutions, Incorporated, Socrates, and Armstrong Economics. He talks Jensen Huang resigning from Nvidia, we talk AI, Europe needing war with Russia, Iran, civil unrest, and much more. Please subscribe, like, and share this podcast. Ladies and gentlemen, the mic is on, and welcome back, Martin Armstrong.

And so nice, isn't it so nice when people, like on YouTube and subsets, they're like, oh, I'm going to do this, I'm going to do this, I'm going to do this, I'm going to do this, I'm going to do this, I'm going to do this, I'm going to do this, I'm going to do this, I'm going to do this, I'm going to do this, I'm going to do this, So nice, isn't it so nice when people, like on YouTube and Substack, can call you out on that? Which I'm actually thankful for, because I'm more cognizant of it. But, you know, it could point out all of our mistakes when we have conversations. So today is November the 12th, and it is 9:15 a.m. mountain time that we're recording this. And, you know, there's so much happening right now, but I thought I'd start off by asking you, what are your thoughts on Jensen Huang? And, you know, he resigned from Nvidia this morning, or today.

Martin Armstrong (2:04)

Well, I heard he resigned. I don't really know all the substantive allegations. At this stage in the game, it doesn't have to be true. It can just be rumors and innuendo. And that's generally enough. But, I mean, it contributes more into the confidence of the whole AI issue from a market standpoint. But, well, I mean, we'll have to see if there's, I mean, chances are, I can't believe that he would have been doing something deliberately.

But, look, this is the way the world is. It's, I mean, they've tried to infiltrate me numerous times. It's, you just have to realize that's part of the game. And it doesn't really matter. I mean, I had brought in a, we set up basically another parallel fake system. And so that when somebody was trying to hack in, we could see who it was and where it went. And that all went back to Langley. It's, so it's, they all went to that.

Particularly because, you know, we do the geopolitical stuff. And so everybody wants to know what the hell the computer's saying next.

Michael Farris (3:49)

What is, I don't know, you and I spent a lot of time talking about AI in the past, but what are your thoughts on, you know, Anthropic and OpenAI, and now this recent news with Nvidia. What do you think when you're seeing all this?

Martin Armstrong (4:05)

Well, as you know, I've been programming in AI actually since the 70s. They call me a classic AI. The difference being my system is confined to the database that it has. It's not going to tell you what Lady Gaga's dog's name is. And there's always been this, I would say, two camps.

And I've always disagreed with the, you know, kind of like the lunatic fringe in my opinion, but that they were working on creating a neural net. And the idea, and this goes back to the 70s, that if you mimicked the human brain, that we're just a supercomputer. That's it, okay? There's no God or anything else. And you just throw in all this data and suddenly will come alive. And I just disagreed with that. And so you have that one camp that goes off here. They call me classic AI, because I don't believe in that stuff. So what these people are doing, where people are getting concerned, is that why they would do this is goes along that idea, that path that will simply come alive. And having it rewrite its own code.

There's no way that you could really know where it's going at that point. There's no human saying, okay, you're going to do, here's your boundaries or whatever. So I mean, that is more concerning.