A String of Near-Disasters

On July 2, a Tianjin Airlines flight bound for Inner Mongolia was forced to abort takeoff after a loud explosion-like sound was heard during acceleration. Emergency vehicles, including fire trucks and ladder trucks, rushed to the tarmac as passengers were evacuated in a tense, chaotic scene. Although the airline attributed the incident to a mechanical fault, critics questioned how such a malfunction escaped pre-flight inspection.

Just two days earlier, on June 30, a Spring Japan (a subsidiary of China’s Spring Airlines) flight from Shanghai to Tokyo experienced a cabin pressure failure mid-air. Oxygen masks dropped, and the aircraft made a terrifying emergency descent — plummeting 7,000 meters in just 10 minutes — before landing safely in Osaka. Videos from passengers showed panic onboard, with many later describing the ordeal as a near-death experience. One traveler, still shaken, said, “My legs are still trembling.”

Even more concerning, the airline initially classified the issue vaguely as a “mechanical failure,” and compensation offered to passengers was minimal — ¥15,000 (around $100) for transport to Tokyo. Several other Spring Japan routes between Japan and China were also canceled in the days that followed, hinting at broader operational issues.

Additional incidents quickly followed: On July 3, an Air China flight from Beijing to Urumqi turned back mid-flight due to unspecified "temporary issues" later described vaguely as “system alerts.”

A Shandong Airlines flight from Qingdao to Shanghai was forced to divert to Nanjing after one engine reportedly ingested a foreign object, triggering loud noises and a burning smell.

On June 15, an Okay Airways flight from Changsha to Zhanjiang declared a 7700 emergency code due to engine failure and returned to the departure airport — its flight path ironically forming the shape of a heart.

The Hidden Cost of U.S. Technology Blockades

These incidents come at a time when China’s aviation industry is under intense strain due to U.S. technology export restrictions. As part of the ongoing trade and tech war, the U.S. has blocked access to critical aerospace components, including jet engines, advanced alloys, sensors, control systems, and even maintenance software.

While Chinese engineers have made strides in mimicking some Western components, replication is not the same as certification. Aircraft parts must undergo rigorous, multi-year testing — often requiring 50,000+ flight hours — to earn safety approvals. Without access to these components or the certification channels to validate alternatives, airlines may be operating aircraft that are increasingly difficult to service or maintain to international safety standards.

For example, GE’s composite fan blades and sealing systems take 10–15 years to develop and certify. China lacks the industrial experience and institutional frameworks to fast-track such processes. Moreover, China still depends on outdated 1960s–70s-era Soviet-based technology for key materials like aircraft-grade steel, which are critical for landing gear and other high-stress components. These materials may "work" but have not passed international certification — raising serious doubts about long-term reliability.

From “Not Afraid of Trade War” to Facing Reality

Early in the U.S.–China trade war, Beijing confidently declared that it was “not afraid to fight.” But in the aerospace sector, China has few levers of retaliation. The reality is that Beijing remains heavily reliant on Western aerospace expertise — and has no near-term path to becoming fully self-sufficient.

Recent signals suggest China is quietly backing down. The Ministry of Commerce has pledged to “expedite implementation of the London Framework,” a vague but telling indication of concessions in the face of sanctions. Behind closed doors, experts believe Beijing is urgently seeking to resume access to Western parts and certification standards — even if that means diplomatic compromise.

A National Security Wake-Up Call

For passengers, the expectation is simple: a safe flight. But aviation safety is not just about pilots and cabin crew — it is the end product of a nation’s industrial capability, regulatory maturity, and geopolitical standing.

The recent spate of flight incidents suggests that China’s civil aviation industry may be entering a period of elevated risk. As aircraft age and maintenance becomes harder under sanctions, flight safety could deteriorate further. The consequences of a single fatal crash — especially one linked to technical failures caused by embargoes — would be catastrophic both domestically and internationally.

This is more than a safety crisis. It’s a wake-up call about the fragility of China’s industrial independence in high-tech sectors. In the skies, there is no room for error — and in geopolitics, there is no substitute for trust.

In the heart of Beijing, 2010, a small store opened its doors, selling quirky pop culture merch—comics, T-shirts, and a handful of collectible toys.

Wang Ning, a 23-year-old entrepreneur, had no idea his venture, Pop Mart, would one day challenge the global reign of Japan’s kawaii queen, Hello Kitty.

Fast forward to 2025, and Pop Mart’s market cap has soared past $33 billion, surpassing the combined valuation of Sanrio (Hello Kitty’s parent), Mattel, and Hasbro.

How did a Chinese toy company disrupt a market long dominated by Japan’s cute culture, and why is it outshining Hello Kitty? This is the story of Pop Mart’s global ascent and its bold rewriting of the collectibles playbook.

The Blind Box Revolution: Pop Mart’s Secret Weapon

Pop Mart’s meteoric rise began with a deceptively simple idea: the blind box. These $8–$15 mystery packages, containing one random designer toy from a series, tapped into a psychological goldmine.

The thrill of the unknown, paired with the allure of rare “secret” figures (like a 1-in-144 chance of snagging a hidden Labubu), created an addictive buying experience. Researchers point to “gambler’s mentality” and “herd mentality” as key drivers, with Millennials and Gen Z—Pop Mart’s core demographic—craving the dopamine hit of unboxing. In 2023, blind boxes alone generated $165 million in net profits, with characters like Molly, Skullpanda, and Dimoo leading the charge.

Unlike traditional toys, Pop Mart’s blind boxes weren’t just products; they were cultural phenomena. Limited-edition drops sparked frenzies, with fans queuing overnight in New York, London, and Dubai. Social media amplified the hype, with TikTok’s #popmart hashtag racking up over 667,000 posts and 1.8 million followers on Pop Mart’s official account. Collectors traded rare figures on second-hand markets, some fetching thousands.

The company’s social media app and toy-trading platform further fueled engagement, turning customers into a global community of superfans.

Pop Mart’s genius lay in its ability to merge scarcity, surprise, and style. While Hello Kitty offered predictable, mass-produced charm, Pop Mart’s toys had an edge—moody, subversive, and artistic. Characters like Skullpanda, with its gothic flair, or Labubu, a snaggletoothed Nordic elf, resonated with young adults seeking individuality, not just nostalgia. B

y platforming artists like Kenny Wong and Kasing Lung, Pop Mart created a multi-character universe, each figure a potential franchise. This wasn’t just a toy company; it was a cultural movement.

Going Global: Pop Mart’s Strategic Expansion

Pop Mart didn’t just conquer China; it set its sights on the world. By 2025, the company had stores in 23 countries, from South Korea to the UK, with overseas sales surging fivefold in 2024. Its London store opening in 2022 marked a bold entry into Europe, followed by outposts in Paris, Milan, and New York. Unlike many Chinese brands that struggled abroad, Pop Mart adapted to local tastes. In North America and Europe, it diverged from the blind box model, letting consumers see toys before buying—a nod to Western preferences for transparency.

The company also leveraged partnerships with global giants like Disney and Sanrio itself, producing toys of Mickey Mouse and Hello Kitty in Pop Mart’s signature style. These collaborations gave Pop Mart instant credibility while subtly positioning it as a peer to legacy brands.

Its “global brand ambassador” program, launched in 2021, enlisted influencers like BLACKPINK’s Lisa, whose viral unboxing of Labubu figurines sent fans into a frenzy. When Lisa declared, “I go to Pop Mart everywhere—New York, Paris, everywhere,” she cemented its status as a global treasure hunt.

Pop Mart’s stores were another differentiator. Unlike Sanrio’s reliance on distributors or online sales, Pop Mart created immersive retail experiences—colorful, Instagram-ready spaces packed with vending machines and “roboshops.” In 2023, it operated 395 stores and 2,328 roboshops worldwide, blending low-cost channels with high-impact branding. This direct-to-consumer model gave Pop Mart control over its narrative and margins, something Sanrio’s fragmented approach couldn’t match.

Hello Kitty’s Stumble: A Fading Kawaii Icon

Hello Kitty, born in 1974, is a global juggernaut worth billions, with her image on everything from toasters to bullet trains. Sanrio’s strategy—simplicity, nostalgia, and ubiquity—made her a cultural staple.

Her minimalist design and “kawaii” appeal triggered universal instincts for care, attracting fans across generations. Collaborations with McDonald’s and Swarovski, plus theme parks like Sanrio Puroland, kept her relevant. Yet, by 2025, Hello Kitty’s dominance was slipping.

Sanrio’s reliance on a single character, while iconic, left it vulnerable. Hello Kitty’s lack of a deep narrative—unlike Pokémon or Disney IPs with rich stories—limited her staying power am

War has never been a factor that stops the rise of U.S. stocks, remains relevant today. Despite ongoing global turmoil, particularly in the Middle East, U.S. equity markets continue to show remarkable strength.

AIRO Group’s Dramatic NYSE Debut

On June 13, AIRO Group, an American aerospace and defense technology company, successfully went public on the New York Stock Exchange. The stock soared 140% on its first trading day, at one point nearly tripling in value and briefly reaching a market capitalization close to $1 billion. Trading was so volatile that circuit breakers were triggered multiple times. The stock ultimately closed at $24 per share, making AIRO the third company this month to see its share price double on its IPO day.

The IPO raised $60 million, with shares priced at $10 each—below the originally expected range of $14 to $16. However, investor enthusiasm remained high, with the offering being completed in just one day due to oversubscription. The number of shares issued was also increased to 6 million from the original plan.

Although the fundraising amount was not enormous, AIRO’s ambitions are much bigger. Chairman Chirinjeev Kathuria stated that the most important aspect of the IPO was to enhance the company’s qualifications and credibility, paving the way for larger government grants and bond market financing in the future.

Kathuria also revealed that AIRO plans to seek $200 million in support from Canada and will pursue further financing through the bond market. He emphasized that as a publicly listed company, AIRO will have greater credibility when bidding for NATO and U.S. Department of Defense projects.

Geopolitical Risks and Market Response

The Middle East has been a powder keg for over a thousand years, and the current situation is again tense: the conflict between Israel and Iran is escalating, fighting in Gaza continues, and the entire region is shrouded in the threat of war. Financial markets, especially sensitive to geopolitical risks, have experienced short-term volatility: oil prices have risen, safe-haven assets like gold have increased, and the U.S. dollar index has become more volatile.

Despite this, U.S. stocks have once again demonstrated impressive resilience and upward momentum, with the Dow Jones, S&P 500, and Nasdaq all approaching record highs. This reinforces a long-held market belief: “War has never been an obstacle to the rise of U.S. stocks.”

Historical Perspective: War and U.S. Stock Performance

Looking back, there is no absolute correlation between war and U.S. stock performance. Historically, U.S. stocks often experience short-term volatility during conflicts but tend to recover and even reach new highs over the medium to long term:

1991 Gulf War: U.S. stocks fell briefly at the start but rebounded as the U.S. military gained the upper hand. The S&P 500 rose over 25% in the following year.

2001 9/11 Attacks and Afghanistan War: Markets panicked and stocks plunged after reopening, but most losses were recovered within three months.

2003 Iraq War: Geopolitical risks and oil prices rose at the start, but U.S. stocks began a new bull run from March 2003.

2022 Russia-Ukraine War: Markets were shaken again, but U.S. stocks rebounded, especially tech stocks, leading to the “AI bull market” in 2023.

These examples show that while war triggers short-term risk aversion in markets, it has never fundamentally altered the long-term trajectory of the U.S. economy and corporate profits.

Russia, Iran, and the Shifting Middle East Landscape

On January 17, Russia and Iran signed a 20-year strategic agreement, but less than six months later, the relationship shifted. When Israel bombed Iranian nuclear facilities on June 13, Iran turned to Russia for help.

While Russia condemned Israel’s actions, President Putin told the Israeli Prime Minister that only diplomacy could solve Iran’s nuclear issue, and the Russia-Iran agreement does not include a mutual defense clause.

Russia is unlikely to intervene in a conflict between Iran and Israel. Putin is preoccupied with the war in Ukraine, and trade with Iran accounts for only about 1% of Russia’s total trade—hardly significant. The deeper reason is that former U.S. President Trump reportedly negotiated with Putin to keep Russia neutral at a critical moment, and neighboring countries have also coordinated with Trump, maintaining official neutrality while allowing Israeli air access, effectively isolating Iran.

Without Russian backing, Iran faces Israel and U.S. military pressure alone, while neighboring countries watch from the sidelines. Trump’s strategic maneuvering, together with Israel, led to a surprise attack on Iran, leaving its leadership vulnerable. Iran, now isolated and relying on its dwindling arsenal, may soon face internal unrest and regime change. Elon Musk’s Starlink service was quickly made available in Iran, allegedly to assist Israeli operations, raising questions about the level of coordination involved.

What’s Next?

With Iran isolated and under pressure, the question remains: who will face the next challenge in this rapidly evolving geopolitical landscape?

Our second meeting took place in Pudong, Shanghai.

Bruce came to visit me at my office. That’s when I found out he had left his hedge fund in New York and had started a new venture focused on active ETFs. I didn’t know much about ETFs back then, and Bruce was the first person I’d met who was starting a business in that space. I asked him about his thought process and told him we should meet again once the product launched.

Not long after that, the pandemic hit, and Bruce was stuck in New York. Our meeting kept getting delayed. I heard he had launched his first active ETF, focused on 5G and the digital economy. I noticed he was posting more frequently—not just his daily running photos, but also his thoughts on markets and investing.

In early 2021, I started following Cathie Wood, the star fund manager hailed by some as Warren Buffett’s successor.

It turned out Bruce had worked at the same firm as Cathie Wood years ago. When I asked him about her, he slapped his knee and said, “Actually, a lot of what we’re doing in thematic ETFs was inspired by Cathie and ARK!”

Clearly, Bruce had a lot of thoughts on active ETFs and Cathie Wood. So we had a long call, where we talked about the rise of active ETFs, how he sees the market, and how he approaches fund management.

Q: Bruce, after nearly 15 years on Wall Street, you launched your own fund in early 2019. Why go the relatively niche route of active ETFs? Can an ETF really make $10 million a day?

B: Back then, I felt like traditional asset management in the U.S. was becoming a sunset industry. Especially for hedge funds—there’s increasing concentration at the top, and scale is more important than ever. It’s getting harder and harder for small, independent funds to survive.

But ETFs still had room to grow. Why? Because they serve a broader audience and offer clear structural advantages.

At the same time, the 4G cycle was ending, and I was trying to figure out where the next major industrial trend would be. I landed on the next wave of tech. In the 4G cycle, funds like Coatue and Tiger Global did incredibly well—very inspiring. But I felt that you didn’t need a hedge fund structure to do this. An ETF could work just as well.

What we’re doing is identifying high-quality companies and holding them. We believe in time and long-term compounding. That mindset can absolutely be applied to an ETF.

Q: Was that decision influenced by your personal experience?

B: Definitely. At the time, I had friends constantly asking me what to invest in, and I was managing my sister’s USD portfolio. I thought, why not build the portfolio I would want my mom to hold for 10 years? If she could trust it, so could others.

I’d worked in U.S. pension management, specifically defined-benefit plans, and saw firsthand how that space was shrinking. Capital is shifting from institutions to individuals. But individuals have to shoulder all the risk—and they need guidance.

Trust is a big deal, and ETFs are structurally easier to trust. Investing in a hedge fund requires a lot of money, and you have to hand it over to the manager—it’s a leap of faith. Entry point is usually $500k–$1 million.

With ETFs, your money stays in your account. It’s transparent. You can see what’s inside. If you like it, you buy it. If you don’t, you sell it. You can start with $10,000. That lowers the trust barrier significantly.

Q: How long did it take you to set up the ETF structure? Where did your first batch of investors come from?

B: We’re using the same infrastructure that’s used by large mutual funds managing billions. Even though we’re small, everything is institutional-grade.

We started speaking with service providers in June 2019, and the first fund went live in March 2020—so about one year end to end.

Most of our first investors were personal contacts—friends, really. Probably 80–90% were individual investors. Over time, we started getting inbound interest from people we’d never met—doctors, insurance professionals, and even folks working at large institutions in California. Some of them would book hour-long calls just to talk through our investment philosophy.

Institutions tend to wait until you reach a certain scale. But individuals don’t have that barrier—and we wanted to serve them.

Q: I’ve heard that most of ARK’s AUM also comes from individuals. Is that true?

B: That’s absolutely true. ARK built its success largely on retail flows. Their flagship fund hit scale thanks to individual investors.

Q: A lot of hedge funds say individuals are too much trouble and prefer institutional money. Why do you think that mindset persists?

B: I think this is where the philosophy diverges—especially between the U.S. and other countries.

A lot of big firms treat ETFs like just another product: “Oh, ETFs are hot, let’s launch one too.” But ETFs are not just a product—they’re an entirely different business model. You need to rethink your whole go-to-market strategy.

Think of traditional retail: before e-commerce, products passed through layers of distributors and intermediaries. By the time they reached consumers, the manufacturers barely made any margin.

E-commerce changed all that. Middlemen without added value got cut out, and the winners were those who built great products and connected directly with consumers.

ETFs are the e-commerce of asset management. The low fees are there to lower the trust cost. You don’t need salespeople. You don’t need a pitch deck. The structure speaks for itself. Investors can look under the hood and make their own decision.

Traditional asset managers still use an old-school sales mentality when selling ETFs. That’s a fundamental misunderstanding.

Q: Your flagship ETF, WUGI, focuses on global tech. What's the core investment idea?

B: We want WUGI to be like Coatue or Tiger Global during the 5G cycle—deep in the tech ecosystem—but accessible to everyone, not just institutions or HNWIs.

We think the next decade of growth will be driven by the U.S. and China, especially in the digital economy. Our research director is based in Asia, has worked in the U.S. and returned to China with deep industry roots. I’m based in the U.S., so we try to bridge both sides—doing fundamental work on both ends.

Q: As CEO and CIO, you’re also very active on social platforms. Is that part of your long-term strategy?

B: Absolutely. We’re committed to transparency and open communication—just like ARK.

We’re not trying to sell products—we’re trying to share ideas. That’s what builds trust with the next generation of investors.

We send out a weekly note to investors. Writing is already part of the research process—now we just share it publicly. We have a media team that helps distribute the content across LinkedIn and Instagram. We’re still ramping up in Chinese-language channels, but we hope to close that gap in the coming months.

Q: Cathie Wood and ARK publish their holdings daily. So do you. Aren’t you worried about being copied?

B: U.S. SEC regulations require ETFs to publish daily holdings, so there’s no way around it. But we’re not worried.

There’s too much secrecy in this industry. The truth is, most people don’t want to actively track 20–30 stocks every day. And in the U.S., ETFs are also more tax-efficient than stocks.

So why not let someone else do the research, pay 0.5% a year, and just hold it long-term? That’s a good deal for 90% of investors.

We’re not trying to play a zero-sum game. We want to grow the pie. Our mission is to be a guide—to spotlight worthy investment themes and make them accessible to everyone.

No secrets. Just shared.

One of the most notable examples — and a regret for Warren Buffett — was Amazon, which started as an online bookstore. In 1994, Jeff Bezos began his venture in a garage. After browsing through the dictionary, he came across "Amazon" (referring to the river) and named his company Amazon.com.

In October 1995, Bezos raised funds. Tom Alberg, now an Amazon board member and Jeff’s friend, invested $50,000 at $0.30 per share. By the IPO on May 15, 1997, Amazon was listed at $18 per share — a 59x return in just two years. That $50,000 investment is now worth $3 billion, with Amazon’s shares growing 30,000x. Bezos, with 17% ownership, became the world's richest man, and Alberg joined the billionaire ranks by investing in only one company: Amazon.

Types of Entrepreneurs over the Past 30 Years:

Entrepreneurs can be broadly classified into three categories:

1. Value Creators (e.g., Tadashi Yanai of Uniqlo):

Businesspeople with sharp instincts.

They follow where the money flows and build scalable, efficient businesses.

They create value from scratch through products and services.

2. Mission-Driven Innovators (e.g., Jimmy Lai):

Focus on delivering value to society via high-quality products/services.

Passionate about perfecting products, often placing ideals above profit.

Seek the underlying logic of market operations.

3. Resource Monopolizers and Integrators:

They rely on monopolies, takeovers, and acquisitions.

This category includes investors and strategists.

While some create new value, others merely redistribute it.

Recently, there’s been a shift: younger generations value integrity and tangible creation over just wealth or status.

Why Is It So Hard to Succeed in Both Business and Investment?

Discipline with Capital: Long-term investing (like Buffett's) requires discipline and patience, which is hard to maintain when holding cash.

Limited Tools in Investing: In business, there are many ways to solve problems. In investing, usually the only real fix is to sell.

Teamwork vs. Individual Intuition: Business success often comes from teams and repeatable systems. Investment relies heavily on individual insight — subjective and hard to replicate.

The Ultimate Cheat Codes:

Be Open BUT Focused: See the whole chaotic board (openness), then plant your flag hard in one high-value square (focus). Knowing everything that's out there actually makes it easier to ignore the noise and specialize. Your superpower? Saying "NO" to a million distractions so you can dominate one thing. Time, energy, and talent are finite. Stop spreading them like cheap jam.

Be Strategically Lazy: Ditch the "hustle porn." True efficiency isn't about doing more; it's about doing fewer, better things. If you must "work hard," make damn sure you're working hard on the highest leverage activities. Is your busywork just making you feel productive, or is it actually moving the needle?

Be honest. Good systems work with human nature, not against it. Stop fighting yourself.

So, aspiring mogul, put down the get-rich-quick brochure. True success is less about chasing the next Amazon and more about careful positioning, smart connections, deep internal work, and the glacial patience of a rock. Now go forth... but maybe stand still and think first.

Will AI Be a Better Junior Analyst?

While some investment banks remain tight-lipped, they're quietly making significant investments in AI. One such investment is in a company called Rogo, which has caught the attention of J.P. Morgan.

So, what exactly is Rogo?

Put simply: if Rogo grows to become a major player, the dream of international students landing a job in an investment banking division (IBD) could become even harder to realize.

The First AI Analyst

Founded in 2021, Rogo is a young and ambitious AI startup with a bold mission: to build the first AI analyst that truly understands finance through a domain-specific large language model (LLM).

In just four years, Rogo’s valuation has soared from $80 million to $350 million. The company completed two funding rounds last year, primarily backed by venture capital firms:

* February 16, 2024: Raised $7 million in seed funding from Alleycorp, Companyon Ventures, BoxGroup, and ScOp Ventures.

* October 1, 2024: Closed a Series A round (amount undisclosed), bringing total funding to $26 million, with investors including Khosla Ventures and Mantis VC.

In 2025, Rogo secured $50 million in Series B funding, attracting heavyweight backers like:

* J.P. Morgan Growth Equity Partners

* Tiger Global

* Positive Sum Ventures, led by Patrick O’Shaughnessy

The Founder Knows the Grind

Rogo’s founder, Gabriel Stengel, is a Princeton graduate with firsthand experience in nearly every prestigious entry-level role in finance and tech:

* Software Engineering Intern at Data Vortex

* Quantitative Trading Intern at Engineers Gate

* Investment Banking Analyst at Lazard, a respected boutique firm known for M&A

Having spent two years grinding at Lazard in New York, Stengel deeply understands the painful reality of a junior analyst's workload. To address this, he teamed up with John Willett and Tumas Rackaitis to launch Rogo—an AI platform designed to streamline the work of junior bankers.

Today, Rogo boasts an impressive client list on its website, including Lazard, Moelis, Nomura, and Tiger Global.

Patrice Maffre, Head of Investment Banking at Nomura International, has praised Rogo’s value, noting that it enables teams to analyze market data with unprecedented speed and accuracy—allowing bankers to focus more on client relationships and strategic advisory.

Wall Street Has Already Gone All In

Every time AI gets involved with investment banking, the same debate reignites: Will AI replace bankers?

* Pessimists believe AI will drastically reduce junior positions.

* Optimists, including Rogo’s founder Gabriel Stengel, argue that AI-powered banks will win more deals and generate more revenue—ultimately demanding more high-level talent.

So, which side do you agree with?

For international students aspiring to work in investment banking, the better question isn’t whether AI will replace analysts—but how to become an analyst who uses AI, taking control of your own job prospects.

From Goldman to Bridgewater, Wall Street Is Betting Big on AI

Every major investment bank is embracing AI in some form:

* Deutsche Bank plans to more than double its 300-person AI team.

* Morgan Stanley has over 30 AI projects in development.

Here’s a closer look at how Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan are leveraging AI:

In mid-2024, Goldman launched a comprehensive AI platform and has since rolled out several tools:

* GS AI Assistant: A ChatGPT-style chatbot available to 10,000+ of Goldman’s 46,000 employees, with plans to expand firm-wide by year-end.

* Translate AI: Used in the Asset and Wealth Management division, this tool supports translation in 9+ languages. Previously outsourced translation took days; now, it takes mere seconds—allowing faster, more relevant content sharing.

In early 2024, J.P. Morgan launched LLM Suite, a generative AI tool similar to ChatGPT, now used across its Asset and Wealth Management division.

LLM Suite helps staff draft, summarize, and ideate documents, interact with internal systems, solve Excel problems, and even spark creativity—dramatically improving productivity.

Even industry-standard tools are being enhanced with AI:

* Bloomberg Terminal now integrates natural language processing for smarter research.

* FactSet launched Pitch Creator, an AI tool that automates model analysis and presentation building—shrinking hours of work into minutes.

Hedge Funds and Asset Managers Join the Race

* Man Group, the world’s largest publicly listed hedge fund, has launched a new GenAI-focused data science team.

* Bridgewater debuted a $2 billion AI fund in July 2024, run by co-CIO Greg Jensen. In May 2025, CEO Nir Bar Dea revealed that the fund has performed on par with human-led strategies—though exact returns were undisclosed.

* EQT, Europe’s first listed private equity firm, began using its in-house AI engine, Motherbrain, in 2016 to identify potential investments. For example, EQT found AnyDesk, a $7.6 million investment, via Motherbrain.

* VanEck is applying AI to enhance its ETF operations.

* AllianceBernstein has been building AI and data science teams since 2017.

Despite AI’s incredible potential to boost efficiency, analysts remain irreplaceable because of their deep analytical capabilities and strategic vision.

In primary markets, analysts must evaluate financial statements, assess company fundamentals, and independently determine investment value based on industry trends.

In secondary markets, they interpret price movements based on macroeconomic indicators, policies, and investor sentiment.

Across M&A, fundraising, and trading, analysts must synthesize complex information using domain expertise—something AI can support, but not replace.

Soft Skills Still Make or Break a Banker

Beyond analysis, investment bankers need strong soft skills:

* Communication: Analysts must extract key information from clients, industry experts, and counterparties. Precision and clarity are critical.

* Leadership: For M&A deals, analysts often lead cross-functional teams from IBD and industry groups—requiring strong coordination and decision-making skills.

AI is transforming Wall Street, but it's not replacing analysts—it’s redefining them. The future belongs to those who can harness AI, not fear it. For students dreaming of investment banking careers, it’s time to evolve from being traditional analysts to becoming AI-powered bankers.

Let’s begin with the conclusion.

We believe that the rise of AI doesn't signal the end of human value. On the contrary, it’s igniting a transformational upheaval across individuals, businesses, and society at large—unlocking unprecedented prosperity.

If you're forward-thinking, this is your cue. Understanding and adapting early to this shift is how you seize the winning strategies of the AI era—and take control of the future.

How Not to Be Replaced

Let’s start at the individual level. Once AI replaces much of our intellectual labor, how do we continue to survive—let alone thrive?

A market analyst report that once took consultants weeks to prepare can now be produced in minutes by OpenAI's Deep Research. This poses a real challenge, especially for junior white-collar workers.

But here’s the key: AI can churn out 10,000 words, but it can’t deliver three lines of real insight.

Humans shouldn’t compete against AI, but rather build on top of it—seeking breakthroughs at a higher level of thinking.

Take content creation: AI can generate 100 marketing campaigns or images in minutes. But only a human can decide which image will resonate emotionally with the target audience, or which strategy aligns with a brand’s long-term vision.

As I often say, the more powerful AI becomes, the more we must learn to be like Napolean. Don’t try to outmatch AI’s capabilities—that’s foolish. Be the strategist who leads, rather than the warrior who fights and loses.

Imagine yourself as the commander of a team of specialized “AI experts” — your own the entire army. Your job isn’t to outperform them, but to direct and integrate their strengths toward a larger strategic goal.

The New Age of Automation

Now, zooming out to the enterprise level: What happens when labor is no longer scarce?

Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff calls this the dawn of the “infinite workforce” era.

AI agents not only streamline operations and reduce costs, but they can scale with business cycles—expanding in peak seasons and contracting in slow periods. They boost human productivity and drive economic growth.

Take Wiley, a major U.S. publisher and Salesforce client. During peak seasons, they use AI agents to scale sales and customer service rapidly. In quieter times, they scale back the AI. This reduces the need for hiring and firing temporary staff, and human customer service involvement has dropped by 50%.

A clear trend is emerging: standardized, rule-based, repetitive tasks—entry-level customer service, basic accounting, even video generation—will be swiftly automated.

But merely replacing people with AI is short-sighted.

Businesses must redesign their workflows with AI at the core—achieving both automation and autonomy, while focusing on human-AI collaboration to optimize performance.

Just as factories now use robotic manufacturing in chips, chemicals, and machinery, humans should become supervisors, designers, and optimizers—not manual laborers.

The same will happen to mental labor. Humans will no longer be the workers, but the architects, operators, and stewards of cognitive processes.

It’s history repeating itself.

In the early 20th century, Ford’s assembly line revolutionized auto production. But instead of mass layoffs, Ford introduced the famous “Five Dollar Day” policy—offering generous wages. Why? Because skilled, stable workers were crucial to keeping the line running. Cutting corners on labor would cost more in downtime than it saved in payroll.

Similarly, as AI boosts enterprise productivity, the “AI foremen”—those who ensure seamless human-AI operations—will become incredibly valuable. Cultivating these talents will be key to staying competitive.

The Great Social Re-division of Labor

Lastly, on the societal level: What fundamental shift will AI bring?

To see the future clearly, we must revisit the past.

The Industrial Revolution also triggered massive job displacement and fear—workers even smashed machines. But in the long run, it delivered explosive productivity, new job creation, and higher-order divisions of labor.

Mechanized agriculture and mass-produced fertilizer helped humanity escape the Malthusian trap. Later, factory automation reduced blue-collar jobs but fueled a booming service economy—design, R&D, marketing—creating a vast white-collar workforce and greater prosperity.

In the post-cognitive-labor era, AI becomes the new assembly line, taking over repetitive mental work. Yes, this will impact white-collar jobs. But it will also lead to new types of work.

Here are three areas where job growth will likely surge:

1. Creative Work

AI dramatically lowers technical barriers in drawing, filmmaking, and writing. This ushers in a creator economy boom. Art, design, film, music, literature—all will flourish.

Those with a good eye and discerning taste will thrive, using AI as a powerful amplifier of their creativity.

2. Passion-as-a-Service

“Influencer” and “creator” economies are just early expressions of interest-driven economies.

In the future, with AI making trial-and-error cheap and safe, passionate communities will flourish. People who love a niche—game design, language learning, history—can gather, collaborate, and co-create new innovations.

Geeks won’t just be elite engineers—they’ll be hobbyists in open-source networks, enabled by AI to launch disruptive ventures.

In gaming, for example, players won’t just consume games—they’ll build worlds, write stories, and earn through selling virtual goods and narratives.

3. Human-Centric Work

As AI takes over the mechanical parts of work, we’ll begin to ask: What makes work truly human?

Many current jobs—drivers, delivery workers, call center agents—treat people like machines. These roles are repetitive, low-growth, and should be automated.

But work that requires empathy, intuition, insight, and emotional intelligence—these remain uniquely human. In the long run, AI will liberate us from mechanical toil and elevate the value of the human spirit.

Rethinking your relationship with AI.

It’s not just about reading tech news or using the latest tools.

* As an individual: Learn to orchestrate AI’s strengths like a strategist, not compete with it.

* As a business: Redesign processes to enable automation and autonomy, and boost human-AI synergy.

* As a society: Embrace the new division of labor. Creativity becomes the main currency. Humanity is liberated. Dynamism returns.

So now, take a moment and ask yourself:What do I truly love to create?With such powerful tools at my fingertips, what future do I want to build?

And most importantly—now that we know this transformation is coming—Why not become one of the first to embrace and drive it?

Through its strategic investments, such as in CoreWeave, Applied Digital, and Recursion Pharmaceuticals, Nvidia is not just supporting companies, but is architecting a new financial system where these companies act as "commercial banks" distributing and monetizing this computational currency.

This paradigm shift is changing how companies are valued, moving away from traditional metrics and towards the deployment and utilization of computational resources, indicating a fundamental change in tech capitalism and the future of AI development.

Building Computing Power as the New Currency

Nvidia's recently disclosed investment portfolio resembles a venture capital list, spanning cloud computing, data centers, AI biotech, edge computing, and low-power chips.

However, focusing solely on the investment targets risks missing a larger trend: Nvidia is laying the groundwork for a new financial order where computing power acts as a "quasi-currency," redefining tech capitalism.

Nvidia is effectively assuming the role of the "central bank" in this new financial system. If Nvidia is the central bank, its portfolio companies are the commercial banks. By allocating GPU computing power, Nvidia shapes the future tech economic landscape.

These companies aren't primarily inventing new technologies; they are repackaging raw computing power into new services, new supply chains, and new value propositions.

A Structural Shift: Computing Power as Asset and Currency

We stand at a pivotal moment of structural transformation: Computing power is not just an asset; it's becoming a new form of currency. As the deployment and training of AI models (like ChatGPT) become increasingly reliant on high-performance GPUs, the supply-demand value of these chips as tangible resources becomes evident.

Companies controlling computing resources will dictate the cost barriers for AI training. In other words, buying GPUs is no longer mere equipment procurement; it's akin to acquiring "computational liquidity rights" – a financial transaction. Nvidia supplies the GPUs; these companies take them, convert them into assets or cash flow, and reinvest to expand capacity. Isn't this "Modern Monetary Theory" (MMT) 2.0 for the tech-capital world?

Moreover, these companies aren't just competing with giants like Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, or Meta Platforms; they are forcing the "Magnificent Seven" to innovate relentlessly or risk obsolescence.

The Role of the Commercial Banks

Let's examine key Nvidia-backed companies and their roles in this computing power economy:

CoreWeave: This company secures thousands of Nvidia H100 and GB200 GPUs to build its own cloud platform. It doesn't just sell cloud services; it sells "AI-ready combat power." Unlike traditional Amazon or Google Cloud data centers, CoreWeave treats computing power as a liquid asset, redistributing it to enterprises needing immediate AI capability. Its valuation hinges not on EBITDA, but on GPU Deployment Rate – proving computing power is the core asset.

Applied Digital (APLD): APLD focuses on converting Nvidia's computing power into solutions outside Google's self-built data centers, repackaging it to offer new services and challenge the traditional data center model.

Weave Communications (WEAV): WEAV isn't a traditional hardware or SaaS company. Its foundation is computing power (data processing, analytics, model training, real-time response), enabling it to create entirely new business models, market demands, and value. It acts like a "loom," weaving together disparate endpoints, devices, data sources, users, and applications into a unified, intelligent network.

Recursion Pharmaceuticals (RXRX): RXRX leverages AI to apply computing power in biotech, challenging the inefficiencies of traditional big pharma and pioneering an AI-driven approach to drug discovery.

These companies disrupt traditional business logic.

Their core isn't product sales or profits; it's scaling computing power deployment and increasing turnover to generate value – much like commercial banks. They receive Nvidia's "currency" (GPUs) and transform it into assets, services, or cash flow.

Every new enterprise training AI models or leasing GPUs effectively allows these companies to "print money" by distributing and circulating computing power.

* CoreWeave breaks cloud giants' monopolies by offering non-Amazon/Azure/Google Cloud access.

* APLD provides non-Google data center options.

* RXRX challenges inefficient traditional pharma with AI biotech.

Regardless of who ultimately wins among these players, Nvidia, as the central bank of computing power supply, remains the ultimate winner.

Implications for Investors

Investors relying solely on traditional PE ratios, EPS, or gross margins risk missing this structural shift towards computing power as an asset class.

These companies aren't merely growth stocks; they are evolving into financial agents ("AI Agents") for the computing power economy.

Imagine if the deployment of Saudi Arabia's GPT model or AI training demand becomes critically dependent on specific Nvidia GPUs. These chips gain intrinsic supply-demand value in the physical world. Companies controlling access to these computing resources will dictate the cost of AI training for enterprises.

This represents a fundamentally different capital logic – perhaps not just the next step for tech stocks, but another form of financial capitalism itself.

Nvidia isn't just investing in startups; it's investing in the early architecture of an entire "computing power monetary system." If the market embraces this valuation model, providers of deployed computing power could become rarer and more fundamental than SaaS companies or even cloud infrastructure.

The critical question for investors now: These companies won't just seek growth; they will aim to become agents of capital markets.

This is the future Jensen Huang is truly betting on.

While more common in older generations, this practice is becoming increasingly prevalent among those in their 20s, even surpassing involvement among those in their 60s.

This trend is attributed to several factors, including increased exposure to funerals, the rise of "digital shukatsu" focusing on online assets, a desire for greater personal control over end-of-life arrangements, and a general societal shift in attitudes towards discussing death. Ultimately, this early planning is seen not as a fear of death, but rather a desire to live more intentionally.

According to the survey, which included 1,500 respondents aged 20 to 70, about 24.6% are currently involved in some form of shūkatsu. As expected, the highest rate was found among those aged 70 and above, with nearly 48% participating. What’s unexpected, however, is that the second-highest group isn’t the 60-somethings—but rather those in their 20s, with a participation rate of 26.8%, slightly above the 25.2% recorded for people in their 60s.

This trend goes beyond simply thinking about the future. Many young people are already taking practical steps—writing wills, recording farewell messages for loved ones, and even having memorial portraits taken. These were once activities reserved for the final chapters of life. Now, they are being adopted by individuals just beginning their adult journeys.

A Cultural Shift Decades in the Making

Japan’s shūkatsu culture isn’t entirely new. The term gained traction over a decade ago amid Japan's rapidly aging society. It originally referred to end-of-life preparations such as sorting through personal belongings, planning funerals, and choosing burial plots. Until recently, though, these actions were primarily undertaken by the elderly.

So why is this trend now sweeping through the younger generation?

Analysis points to a crucial factor: increased exposure to death. Compared to previous generations, today’s youth are more likely to attend funerals of grandparents, family friends, or even peers. These experiences make the reality of death more immediate and tangible. The somber rituals—chanting monks, the scent of incense, the quiet tears of family members—leave lasting impressions on young mourners, prompting introspection.

I’ve been to many funerals. It’s not rare to see young people dressed in black, bowing in silence, sometimes even helping to greet guests. These moments, though solemn, serve as emotional touchpoints, reshaping how youth view life and death.

Personal Encounters Spark a Movement

One young man in his 20s recounted attending his grandmother’s funeral during college. That intimate brush with mortality led him to ponder a difficult question: “If I were to leave this world, what would I leave behind?” At 25, he wrote his first will, outlining how to handle his belongings and digital accounts.

He is far from alone. The study found that personal experiences with loss—especially the death of someone close—are a key motivator behind the surge in youth-led shūkatsu.

Another factor is the rise of “digital shūkatsu.” This involves organizing one's digital legacy—photos, social media accounts, e-wallets, and even cryptocurrency wallets. For tech-savvy young adults, managing digital assets comes naturally. Preparing for a “digital afterlife” often begins with a smartphone or laptop, making the process feel less daunting than traditional estate planning.

For many, platforms like LINE, Instagram, or X are more than just social tools—they’re archives of memories and personal identity. Protecting or curating that digital legacy has become an important part of preparing for the end.

The Desire for Autonomy

Sociologists in Japan suggest that this movement reflects a deeper longing among young people for personal agency. In the past, funerals and memorials were typically managed by families, often following social customs with little room for individual preferences. Today’s youth, however, are seeking to assert their wishes—whether that means opting for a modest funeral, donating their assets to charity, or choosing alternative burial methods like tree burials or scattering ashes at sea.

This growing interest in personalization is backed by data: 40.4% of people in their 20s said they want a funeral after death, a figure that trails only the 70s and 60s age groups. But rather than rejecting funerals, young people are redefining what a farewell ceremony should be—often prioritizing simplicity, environmental impact, or emotional resonance over tradition.

Breaking the Taboo

In the past, openly discussing death—especially among young people—was seen as inappropriate or even unlucky in Japan. But those taboos are steadily eroding. Death is no longer a forbidden topic, thanks to the normalization of shūkatsu culture in books, TV shows, and even casual social media conversations. It’s not uncommon now to hear young people joking with friends, “So, have you written your will yet?”

Japan’s demographic reality is impossible to ignore. With over 28% of its population aged 65 or older, aging and death are daily considerations. The COVID-19 pandemic only deepened this awareness. Many young adults lost loved ones during the crisis or watched others grieve, bringing mortality into sharper focus.

Living More Consciously

To outsiders, young people writing wills might seem morbid or overly cautious. But beneath the surface lies a complex mix of social change, digital evolution, and personal growth. By confronting death early, Japan’s youth may actually be embracing life more fully.

As one university student put it: “I didn’t write a will because I’m afraid to die—I wrote it because I want to live with clarity.”

In that single sentence lies the essence of this emerging mindset: facing the end, not with fear, but with intention.

University education, often seen as fulfilling, frequently involves activities like socializing, trading stocks, or dancing rather than practical skills for the workforce. While it may build knowledge, research skills, critical thinking, and teamwork, these are qualities young people naturally develop, not unique to schooling. Schools don’t cultivate talent; they filter it.

A university degree merely signals to society that certain individuals are better at solving set problems after 20 years of standardized tasks.

Those who excel in better companies after graduation would likely have succeeded without formal education, as their abilities are inherent, not school-taught.

The 20 years spent in education is inefficient—smart individuals could achieve financial freedom in that time by pursuing real-world opportunities. Schools primarily keep young people occupied, reducing social disruption and unemployment, especially as lifespans increase and marriage is delayed.

Education molds people into standardized “products” rather than opportunity-driven individuals. Society needs 90% standardized workers to function, not 90% opportunists. While standardized skills prevent poverty, they don’t lead to exceptional success, highlighting a conflict between individual and societal needs. Schools apply uniform education to all, ignoring individual potential, as they cannot predict who will be the top 10%.

Money-making ability stems from awareness, not skills. Figures like Lucy Gao, Alexandr Wang, Jack Ma or Bill Gates succeeded by spotting opportunities, not performing labor themselves—that’s the role of standardized workers.

Wealth creators take a larger share because they identify opportunities others can’t. Complaining about exploitation misses the point: standardized skills aren’t what society values most.

Lifelong learning is essential, but individuals must choose what to learn. True learners embrace knowledge for growth, not as a task. The essence of learning is developing the awareness to seize opportunities, not just acquiring skills.

According to the Japan National Tourism Organization (JNTO), Australian tourist numbers reached a record 637,300 from January to September 2024, a 42% increase over the previous high in 2019. The Japanese government has subtly urged Australians to explore less popular destinations and travel during off-peak seasons to ease the burden of overtourism in major cities.

Beyond tourism, many Australians are buying properties in Japan, drawn by affordable real estate and a lower cost of living.

For example, a Melbourne couple, Jaya Thursfield and Chihiro, purchased a traditional house in Ibaraki Prefecture for AUD 30,000, documenting their experience on YouTube, while a Tasmanian chef, Steve Cunningham, bought an apartment in Nagano for AUD 42,000. On Reddit, a forum called "Escape from Australia" with 32,000 members frequently discusses Japan as an affordable alternative to Australia’s high living costs. In 2024, Australian applications for long-term Japanese residency surged by 47%, a record high.

Several factors drive this trend. Strong Australia-Japan ties, with 107 sister city relationships and 400,000 Australians learning Japanese, foster cultural affinity. Japan’s anime and cuisine are particularly popular among young Australians. The strong Australian dollar against the yen (reaching over 100 in 2024) makes Japan’s cost of living, such as meals and housing, significantly cheaper than in Australia. For instance, a burger meal in Tokyo costs 30-50% less than in Sydney.

Seasonal complementarity also plays a role, with Japan’s winter attracting Australians escaping their summer heat, especially for ski trips in Hokkaido and Nagano.

Japan’s affordable housing market, driven by a declining population and abundant vacant properties (Akiya), contrasts sharply with Australia’s housing shortage and high prices. Rural Japanese homes can cost as little as JPY 100,000-500,000, and even in cities like Tokyo, apartments are cheaper than in Sydney.

Lower property taxes and higher rental yields (4-6% in Japan vs. 2-3% in Australia) further attract investors. Japan’s relaxed policies, like the 2024 digital nomad visa, also make it easier for Australians to relocate.

This combination of cultural, economic, and policy factors has fueled Australia’s growing fascination with Japan.

After a failed U.S. listing attempt and a stalled London bid (due to lack of Chinese regulatory approval), SHEIN is reportedly shifting its focus to Hong Kong.

Hong Kong is seen as a more viable option due to potentially higher valuations, stronger market capacity, greater efficiency, and a more favorable regulatory environment for Chinese-backed companies. SHEIN's valuation has been significantly downgraded, and its path forward remains highly uncertain as it navigates these complex financial and geopolitical headwinds.

2024 Financial Performance: The Profitability Struggle Behind Growth

SHEIN's recently released 2024 financial report presents a complex picture. The report shows that the company achieved strong sales growth of 19% in 2024, reaching $38 billion.

However, in stark contrast, net profit for the same period plummeted by nearly 40% to just $1 billion. This figure is a far cry from the 2024 financial forecast SHEIN presented to investors in early 2023—which predicted revenue of $45 billion and a net profit of $4.8 billion.

This means actual net profit plummeted by about 80% compared to expectations, suggesting not just a failure to meet sales targets, but also potentially deeper structural issues, cost pressures, and external forces reshaping the fast-fashion landscape. Particularly in the fourth quarter of 2024, SHEIN faced tough competition from rivals like Temu, which impacted profits.

The significant decline in profitability has posed new challenges to SHEIN's long-planned IPO. This has directly raised investor concerns and forced the company to re-evaluate the sustainability of its business model and its valuation expectations. Although initial market rumors suggested SHEIN sought a valuation as high as $90 billion, the latest forecasts indicate its valuation could face a significant markdown, potentially to $50 billion, or even as low as $30 billion.

Based on the reported latest valuation of around $50 billion, compared to a net profit of $1 billion, this valuation appears too high and faces significant pressure to be justified, whether compared to the fast-fashion industry's average P/E ratio of about 26x or the U.S. electronics industry's average P/E ratio of less than 22x.

Deeper Reasons for Profit Erosion and IPO Challenges

SHEIN's declining profit margins and stalled IPO process are due to a combination of factors:

* Impact of Tariff Policies: SHEIN has long benefited from the U.S. "de minimis" rule, avoiding high tariffs by directly mailing small packages. This provided cost support for its ultra-low price strategy. However, recent U.S. policy adjustments are eroding this advantage. With tariff rates expected to rise sharply from 0% to 20-35%, SHEIN's cost structure is threatened. The company will be forced to make a difficult choice between raising prices (potentially alienating price-sensitive consumers) or absorbing higher costs (further squeezing profit margins). Furthermore, the U.S. intensified its tariff war in April and plans to eliminate the "de minimis" exemption for express courier packages entering the country from May 2nd. Considering that the U.S. market accounts for up to 30% of SHEIN's sales and its production capacity is mainly concentrated in Guangzhou, China, this change significantly increases its supply chain costs and could drag down demand-side performance in the U.S. market.

* Supply Chain Disruption and Intensified Competition: The rise of tariff barriers may allow traditional fast-fashion giants with more flexible or diversified supply chains (like Zara and H&M) to narrow the price gap with SHEIN. Meanwhile, new competitors with localized production capabilities may gain an advantage. The global trend of "deglobalization" may also force SHEIN to reconsider its offshoring strategy, potentially investing in more expensive nearshoring or reshoring production and local warehousing.

* This would entail high restructuring costs, further squeezing profit margins. SHEIN's core competency lies in its agile supply chain and digitally-driven "small order, quick response" model, which reduces inventory risk and improves efficiency through rapid trial-and-error and precise demand response. Its supply chain hub is located in Panyu, Guangzhou, close to apparel factory clusters, working closely with small and medium-sized factories and using digital tools for management and incentives. However, external changes in tariffs and trade policies are directly challenging this efficient model.

* Changing Consumer Preferences and Regulatory Environment: The fast-fashion industry globally faces increasing scrutiny over labor rights, environmental impact, and trade compliance issues. Consumers are also increasingly inclined to choose brands that align more with ethical and sustainable principles. If these trends continue, SHEIN may need to make strategic adjustments to adapt to new market demands, which could mean higher operating costs and lower profit margins, a significant deviation from its current model.

Hao, an award-winning journalist with deep roots in AI reporting, leverages her unparalleled access to OpenAI and her global fieldwork to deliver a narrative that is both a corporate saga and a broader critique of the AI industry’s imperial ambitions.

Hao begins with her early coverage of OpenAI in 2019, when the organization, founded as a nonprofit with a mission to prioritize safety and public benefit, seemed like a beacon of ethical AI development.

However, as she traces OpenAI’s transformation into a $300-billion behemoth—fueled by Microsoft’s billions and the runaway success of ChatGPT—she reveals how its altruistic ideals were eroded by commercial pressures and a relentless pursuit of artificial general intelligence (AGI).

The book’s title, Empire of AI, is no metaphor; Hao argues persuasively that OpenAI and its peers operate like modern colonial empires, extracting vast resources—compute power, data, labor, energy, and water—while leaving environmental and human tolls in their wake.

The strength of Hao’s work lies in its dual perspective: she navigates the “command capsule” of Silicon Valley, where egos and ideologies collide, while grounding her narrative in the real-world consequences felt by data workers in Kenya, environmental activists in Chile, and communities grappling with AI’s resource demands.

Her reporting, based on over 300 interviews with 260 sources, is vivid and authoritative, painting a picture of an industry driven by secrecy, hype, and questionable ethics. One particularly striking anecdote involves OpenAI’s cofounder Ilya Sutskever burning an effigy at a team retreat, hinting at the messianic fervor surrounding AGI within the company.

Hao’s critique extends beyond OpenAI to the broader AI ecosystem, where she sees a “new, ominous age of empire” defined by a handful of powerful companies. She challenges the narrative of inevitability surrounding AI’s trajectory, pointing to open-source and less resource-intensive alternatives as viable paths forward.

Her analysis is bolstered by endorsements from figures like Daron Acemoglu, a 2024 Nobel laureate, who praises the book as a warning about AI’s threat to democracy, and Dr. Joy Buolamwini, who highlights its call for a more equitable AI future.

The book is not without flaws.

At times, the narrative’s focus on OpenAI’s internal drama—such as Sam Altman’s 2023 firing and reinstatement—can overshadow the global impacts Hao aims to emphasize. Additionally, while her prose is engaging, some readers may find the technical discussions dense, though Hao strives to make them accessible.

Critics might also note that Sam Altman’s refusal to be interviewed leaves a gap in the narrative, though Hao’s extensive sourcing mitigates this.

Empire of AI is a clarion call to rethink the AI arms race. It’s a must-read for anyone seeking to understand the hidden costs of a technology reshaping our world. Hao’s blend of insider access, global perspective, and incisive critique makes this book a standout, earning accolades from outlets like The New York Times and The Economist for its depth and urgency.

As Hao concludes, the future of AI need not be dystopian—but only if we confront the empires building it.

A skewer of yakitori priced at 18 yuan (approximately 360 yen) and a glass of affordable beer evoke a nostalgic return to Japan’s "lost era" of 30 years ago. This "high cost-performance" resonates deeply in today’s China, where economic challenges are palpable.

China’s Economic ContextChina is grappling with a significant economic downturn: rising youth unemployment, declining real estate prices, and tightening consumer budgets. Yet, consumers crave "small moments of happiness" within controllable costs. Japanese companies, with decades of expertise in delivering "affordable quality," are well-positioned to meet this demand.

Tori Noble is not an isolated success. Sushiro, which entered China in 2021, now operates 51 stores. Saizeriya, an Italian-style affordable restaurant chain, arrived in 2003 and has expanded to 400 locations. In 2024, Saizeriya’s net profit reached 14.8 billion yen, with 8.3 billion yen generated from China. The success of these Japanese restaurants lies not in luxury or cultural novelty but in the fundamentals of dining: affordability, satisfaction, and safety.

As Tadashi Okura, president of Torikizoku (Tori Noble’s parent company), stated: "In a depressed economy, cost-effectiveness resonates deeply." Torikizoku aims to open 650 stores in China, matching its Japanese footprint.

Nitori’s MisstepIn contrast, Nitori (宜得利家居), a Japanese home goods retailer, has faced challenges in China. On May 13, 2025, Akio Nitori, the company’s chairman, admitted at a Tokyo financial conference: "Opening stores in China was a mistake." This candid statement sent ripples through Japan’s business community.

Nitori’s failure stems not from product quality but from flawed scale. The company pursued a "re-equipped" strategy, opening large 1,500–2,000-square-meter stores in first-tier city malls, aiming to replicate IKEA’s experiential model. However, in China’s post-pandemic landscape, "traffic does not equal sales." Consumers have shifted toward "fast, local, and compact" shopping preferences. The "Matthew effect" has intensified: premium malls thrive, while third-tier business districts languish. Many of Nitori’s stores were opened in the wrong locations at the wrong time.

In 2024, Nitori opened 23 new stores in China but closed 18. In 2025, it plans to open 24 new stores while closing 22, resulting in a net gain of just two. Vice President Masanori Takeda announced a strategic pivot: Nitori will downsize stores, focus on high-traffic areas, and aim for profitability in China by 2027. This reflects a broader lesson: even excellent products fail if placed on the wrong stage.

Meiji’s Bold EntryMeiji Delicious Milk will debut in China in July 2025 as Zhen Hao Drinking Milk, with a preview at the Shanghai Food Exhibition on May 19. Produced at Meiji Dairy’s Suzhou factory, it will retail at 29.9 yuan—nearly 50% above the market average. This premium pricing seems counterintuitive, but Meiji is confident.

The brand has cultivated a loyal following through Chinese tourists’ social media buzz on WeChat, Weibo, and Douyin. Memories of "drinking Meiji milk in Japan" have fueled purchase intent. Meiji’s strategy blends local production, high quality, and a premium price point. While the outcome remains uncertain, this approach offers valuable lessons for other brands navigating China’s market.

Tsutaya’s RetreatTsutaya Bookstores in Xi’an, Shanghai, and Tianjin have closed within six months, signaling a cooling "internet celebrity economy." Once hailed as the "most beautiful bookstore," Tsutaya prioritized lifestyle aesthetics over book sales. However, its franchise-based model in China, operated by local partners rather than Tsutaya’s headquarters, struggled with high rents and cautious consumer spending. Overpriced goods and dining options were dismissed as an "IQ tax."

Tsutaya’s challenges highlight a broader issue: replicating Japanese aesthetics without addressing China’s pragmatic, cost-conscious market leads to failure.

Yin and Yeung in the Chinese MarketFrom Torikizoku triumphant opening to Nitori’s closures and Tsutaya’s retreat, Japanese brands in China navigate a complex interplay of opportunity and challenge.

Amid tensions between China and the U.S., rising production costs, and China’s maturing supply chain, some Japanese manufacturers are shifting production to Southeast Asia. Yet, the "Japanese consumption experience" continues to captivate China’s middle class. From convenience stores to ramen, sake, and beauty products, Japanese brands thrive by offering "quality, reliability, and value."

This duality—strategic industrial adjustments alongside consumer market exploration—defines the "yin and yang" of Japanese businesses in China. As many long-established Japanese companies note, there is no secret to succeeding in China. The market has not closed; it has become more discerning, demanding patience and localization.

Companies that grasp this dynamic can carve out a path to success in China’s evolving landscape.

Approximately 20 million gallons of herbicides, including 13 million gallons of Agent Orange, were sprayed over Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos, affecting 4.5 million acres. Agent Orange contained dioxin (TCDD), a highly toxic contaminant linked to severe health issues, including cancers, birth defects, and neurological disorders.

The Vietnamese population suffered devastating consequences. The Vietnamese government estimates 4.8 million people were exposed, with 400,000 deaths and 500,000 children born with birth defects due to dioxin exposure. Health issues persist across generations, with conditions like spina bifida, hydrocephalus, and severe deformities reported in affected areas.

Ecological damage also endures, with dioxin contaminating soil and water, entering the food chain, and causing long-term environmental harm. Most Vietnamese victims receive minimal or no specialized healthcare, with facilities like Friendship Village, funded by foreign veterans, treating only a small fraction of those affected.

Monsanto has consistently denied responsibility, asserting that Agent Orange was produced under U.S. government contracts and that no conclusive scientific link exists between dioxin and the reported health effects. The company has argued that compensation is a governmental responsibility. In 2004, the Vietnamese Association for Victims of Agent Orange/Dioxin (VAVA) filed a class-action lawsuit against Monsanto and other manufacturers in a U.S. court, seeking billions in damages for health and environmental impacts, but the case was dismissed in 2008. Similar lawsuits, including one in France in 2021 by Vietnamese-French citizen Tran To Nga, were also dismissed, leaving Vietnamese victims without compensation from Monsanto or the U.S. government. In contrast, U.S. veterans exposed to Agent Orange received a $180 million settlement in 1984 from Monsanto and other companies, highlighting a disparity in treatment.

Grassroots movements in Vietnam, supported by organizations like VAVA and the Center for Gender, Family and Environment in Development, continue to advocate for justice and compensation.

The Vietnamese government has implemented limited compensation programs, offering modest payments (e.g., $3.40–$7.14 monthly) to some victims, but these are deemed inadequate. Since 2012, the U.S. and Vietnam have collaborated on cleanup efforts, such as dioxin remediation at Da Nang and Bien Hoa air bases, with the U.S. providing funds (e.g., $41 million for Da Nang).

However, U.S. assistance avoids explicitly acknowledging Agent Orange as the cause of disabilities, frustrating Vietnamese advocates who see this as a double standard compared to U.S. veterans’ benefits.

Monsanto’s return to Vietnam in the 2010s to promote genetically modified seeds sparked resistance among activists and legislators, who view the company’s involvement as insensitive given its Agent Orange legacy.

Despite these efforts, Monsanto faced little accountability, and the Vietnamese government’s warming relations with the U.S. have sometimes muted official criticism.

The legacy of Agent Orange remains a profound public health and social challenge in Vietnam, with ongoing calls for Monsanto and the U.S. to provide comprehensive reparations and acknowledge the full extent of the harm caused.

Key strategies involve increasing food access, improving agricultural productivity, strengthening social safety nets, reducing food waste, and promoting sustainable agriculture.

Here is an executive summary about 株式会社ドローフーズ (Draw Foods) and why we see this company can increase investment in agriculture to improve productivity, efficiency, and incomes, especially for small-scale producers.

The company is 株式会社ドローフーズ (Kabushiki Gaisha Draw Foods). They are located in Shimoichi-cho, Yoshino-gun, Nara Prefecture, Japan.

What They Do:

Draw Foods is engaged in land-based aquaculture of Vannamei shrimp. Their product is branded as "Yoshino Yusui Ebi" (吉野游水えび), which are Vannamei shrimp cultured at the foot of Mt. Yoshino.

They operate an indoor closed recirculating system utilizing clean spring water from Mt. Yoshino. The company has developed its own "Bio-Denitrification System" which uses microorganisms to enhance water purification. They also employ remote temperature management and water quality measurement, along with regular cleaning, to meticulously control the growth environment.

Japan faces a significant reliance on imported shrimp, with imports accounting for over 90% of consumption. This results in a particularly low self-sufficiency rate for shrimp compared to other seafood. Relying so heavily on imports brings concerns about ensuring a stable supply, as it is affected by factors like exchange rate fluctuations.

Overseas intensive aquaculture, a major source of imports, can also lead to environmental issues such as mangrove cutting and water pollution from leftover food, feces, and dead animals. Furthermore, the high-density conditions can cause stress and the spread of diseases, often leading to the use of large amounts of antibiotics.

Draw Foods addresses these problems by establishing a domestic source of shrimp production. Their land-based closed system allows for production in a landlocked area like Nara Prefecture, demonstrating that production is not restricted to coastal areas. By controlling the rearing environment, they aim to provide a safe and stable supply of shrimp, independent of the environmental and health concerns associated with some overseas production methods.

The closed system also has a small environmental impact.

Is This a Good Opportunity?

The domestic breeding of Vannamei shrimp, as undertaken by Draw Foods, appears to represent a promising opportunity. Japan has the highest per capita consumption of shrimp in the world and shrimp is a significant import.

The low domestic self-sufficiency rate and issues with import reliability and sustainability highlight a strong need and potential market for domestically produced shrimp.

Domestic breeding of shrimp is expected to contribute to a safe food supply, economic activation, job creation, and the establishment of production sites within Japan. Vannamei shrimp are noted for being inexpensive, having a soft texture and sweet taste, and are widely aquacultured. They are also more efficient at converting feed into meat compared to livestock and some fish, suggesting they can be a sustainable source of protein.

Land-based aquaculture systems, like the one used by Draw Foods, offer advantages such as a stable breeding environment, reduced environmental impact, and the ability to locate production away from natural water sources, thereby avoiding risks like red tides, typhoons, and the entry of pathogens. While initial investment can be high, domestic breeding is seen as having the possibility of high profit rates.

Recent years have seen increased attention and entry into the domestic land-based shrimp breeding business by various entities, indicating a growing interest and belief in its potential.

Last month, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang visited Beijing, sending a clear message of the company’s unwavering commitment to the Chinese market—despite growing pressure from the U.S. government to pull back.

In recent years, the U.S. has imposed a series of escalating export controls aimed at cutting off China’s access to advanced AI chips, which rely heavily on both computing power and memory bandwidth. In response to these restrictions, Nvidia developed chips like the H800 and H20, specially tailored to comply with U.S. regulations while still serving Chinese clients.

However, the U.S. has since tightened its rules further, banning chips based on overall performance regardless of bandwidth, effectively blocking these products as well. Despite these efforts, restricted chips continue flowing into China through a network of offshore data centers, opaque intermediaries, and smuggling operations.

Malaysia’s Johor state, for instance, has become a key data hub, offering Chinese firms like ByteDance a workaround by leasing computing power housed in U.S.-made servers equipped with Nvidia chips. Trade data shows a surge in GPU exports from Taiwan to Malaysia, suggesting widespread circumvention.

Meanwhile, smuggling routes involve mislabeled shipments and shell companies, with some estimates indicating that illegal chips account for up to half of China’s AI training capacity. Nvidia claims to comply with all U.S. regulations, but its vast supply chain—spanning cloud providers, server makers, and resellers—makes end-user enforcement difficult.

New U.S. rules introduced in January divide the world into trusted and restricted regions, but enforcement remains weak, with only one official overseeing Southeast Asia.

Even technical solutions, such as disabling chips based on location, are seen as risky or impractical. Nvidia suggests using software telemetry to verify chip placement, but acknowledges that complete oversight is unrealistic.

As pressure mounts, instead of relying solely on ever-stricter controls, the U.S. should prioritize staying ahead in AI innovation.

Its mission is to break down investment in world-class scientific research to global web3 investors, helping to efficiently fund early-stage deep tech start-ups.

Merito aims to fill the market need for capital at the translational research stage, which falls between fundamental research and clinical trials/product manufacturing.

Merito operates as a web3 science investment platform compliant with Japanese regulations. It addresses challenges in Japanese IP project funding, such as in-person, paper-based processes, slow deal-making, language and geographic barriers, and a lack of robust, local deep tech capital.

Merito positions itself as the first DeSci (decentralized science) funding venture in Japan, which it sees as providing a broad moat.

Although the global DeSci market capitalization reached $2.1 billion as of January 2025 and is growing rapidly, the sources highlight the specific funding challenges Merito seeks to solve within Japan. Merito's largest user base is currently in Japan, with plans to expand outward.

The company's principal assets include an IPT (IP token) minting machine for Asia-based deep tech projects on Ethereum, and KikaiDAO, a soon-to-be Switzerland-incorporated entity controlled by Merito that will co-invest with other global web3 investors in project tokens unique to each deep tech project.

Kikai DAO also plans to issue its own governance token. Merito generates revenue through B2B matchmaking and a 9% commission for IPT minting with partner BioDAOs.

Merito has demonstrated traction by lining up three projects to tokenize in Japan with prestigious universities. These include projects from the University of Tokyo (longevity biomarker wearable device), University of Kagoshima (anti-sugar chain antibodies for treating Adult T-cell leukemia/lymphoma), and Keio University (climate tech for sustainable cement production using desert sand).

Merito also has a roster of 18 other IP assets ready to tokenize from Japanese major universities.

Regarding leadership and financials, Brandon Possin is listed as the Co-Founder & CEO and currently owns 75% of Merito. He’s former US Diplomat in Japan, Indonesia and Pakistan, 14 years in Asia, speaks 6 languages.

Vinay Mohan is the Co-Founder & CSO, owning 10%. The company is 100% self-funded by founder capital, with approximately USD $42,000 expended since February 2023, and currently has zero debt or outstanding liabilities.

Merito is currently raising its first external funding round (seed) aiming for USD $500,000 at a pre-money valuation of USD 5 million.

The funds raised are planned to be allocated as follows: 30% for coding Merito’s own minting engine, 50% for marketing and business development to grow the user base, and 20% for administrative and growth expenditures. The fundraise is structured as equity-only, allocating common shares upon funding.

There will be no board seats allocated in this round; board seats will be given to investors starting at Series A rounds.

Merito aims to complete this seed round by mid-May 2025. The company's future business model might also support the issuance of digital tokens, and in such an event, Merito may award 1:1 token warrants to shareholders.

PLTR's P/S is as high as 614, which is almost the highest valued company in the entire technology industry, compared to Nvidia's P/E ratio of only 37. This price is not just expensive - it almost represents a bet on AI faith.

With such a valuation, what kind of performance must it deliver to continue to let the market buy orders? What numbers should we focus on to judge whether its "AI story" is still tenable?

Hello everyone, this is SentimenTrader, a US stock investment website. It was founded in the US in 2001 and is operated by Aether Holdings (Nasdaq: ATHR). It is an independent investment research company focusing on market sentiment analysis. Focusing on AI and exploring US stock investment opportunities, it provides a comprehensive set of tools, including 3,000 Multiple proprietary sentiment, breadth, seasonality and technical indicators, as well as a user-friendly event-based backtesting engine.

These tools are designed to help investors make data-driven decisions by analyzing various market indicators.

Let's look at the big picture first.

As the Q1 2025 earnings season progresses to the middle, the market sends a very clear signal: the AI ​​craze has not cooled down, but has accelerated amid macro and policy interference. Advance.

Let’s start with the most basic “foundation” of AI – infrastructure. ASML, which provides advanced lithography equipment, and TSMC, which is responsible for high-end chip foundry, their performance directly reflects the supply and demand changes of AI computing power.

The financial reports of both companies exceeded expectations, especially TSMC, which not only clearly stated that AI-related revenue will double year-on-year throughout the year, but also withstood the pressure of US export restrictions on China. , maintaining a steady growth rhythm.

More importantly, it intends to increase the price of 4nm chips in Arizona by 30%. The message behind this is: the technical barrier is solid, customers are still willing to pay for scarce resources, and its bargaining power is stronger.

This actually shows one thing: AI's underlying infrastructure is still in short supply.

In the "front is limited by advanced processes and the back is rapid iteration of AI models ", chip manufacturers have gained greater premium space and stronger cash flow capabilities. The capital market will naturally pay more attention to their rhythm control in high-end capacity expansion and customer lock-in management.

At the same time, investment in AI infrastructure has not stopped.

So, the question is: why is the market still willing to give it such a high premium?

A key factor is that it has continued to steadily pass the "Rule 1" commonly used in the software industry. “Rule of 40" is a healthy indicator. This indicator adds the revenue growth rate and profit margin. If the total exceeds 40%, it is considered to be both growth and profit.

In fiscal year 2024, PLTR's full-year revenue growth is 29%. If strategic business contracts are excluded, the core revenue growth is as high as 32%; its Rule of 40 score reaches 68%, and the profit margin is strong.

Looking ahead to the next quarter, the market expects a revenue growth rate of 36%, and the profit margin is expected to increase to 20%, with a combined score of about 56, still "easily surpassing the line".

This conveys an important signal: PLTR is not like many AI companies that only tell stories and burn money to expand. It can really maintain high growth while making money. This "stable and fast" performance will naturally attract continuous capital inflows and provide a certain "rationality" for the current high valuation.

Recently, I came across two promising startups in Fukuoka worth exploring: one focuses on innovative real estate solutions, and the other, Chiral Limited, appears to be breaking new ground in its field.

The founder Koji is from MIT and work in Takeda (No.1 Pharmaceutical company in Japan), speak perfect English.

Company Overview

Chiral Ltd. is a SaaS startup focused on providing a web-based computational infrastructure for scientific computing, with an initial emphasis on drug discovery. The company aims to streamline R&D processes by enabling scientists to perform complex simulations without high-spec hardware, cloud configuration, or dedicated IT support.

Chiral’s mission is to empower researchers to achieve scientific breakthroughs and drive innovative product development across industries such as pharmaceuticals, chemicals, and aerospace. The platform is accessible via a user-friendly web interface and supports major programming languages through a versatile API.

Operations

Chiral operates a cloud-based platform, Chiral Computing Cloud, which allows users to migrate scientific applications to the cloud seamlessly. The solution eliminates the need for high-performance PCs, complex cloud setups, or IT engineering support, reducing setup time from months to a single day and significantly lowering costs. The platform charges based on computing jobs submitted, optimizing infrastructure costs compared to traditional time-based cloud server rentals.

Key features include:

Factors such as Japan's stable society with low unemployment, which reduces the urgency to start a business, and a cultural emphasis on stability and traditional career paths. The challenges in accessing funding and the social stigma associated with failure.

Furthermore, it notes that the Japanese perspective on starting a business differs, viewing it as a serious, long-term commitment requiring specific capabilities like strong psychological resilience and sufficient resources, rather than a quick path to wealth.

As for starting a business—it feels like a distant dream to many of them. Entrepreneurship implies high risk, uncertainty, and the potential to disrupt one’s current lifestyle. For young Japanese people who are used to stability, this clearly isn’t an appealing option. Even their parents would advise them to think twice.

Moreover, Japan doesn’t have a tradition of relying on parental support into adulthood ("mooching off parents"). Young people rarely ask their parents to fund a startup attempt, because if the venture fails, it would mean wasting their parents’ retirement savings—causing a deep sense of guilt.

Starting a business in Japan isn’t like in Silicon Valley, where it’s relatively easy to find investors. Japanese banks are conservative, and venture capital is not very active. Especially for young people without assets, it’s extremely hard to secure initial funding.

Japan’s society is built on a "culture of trust and reputation." A failed entrepreneur is often labeled as having "poor credit" or a damaged reputation, which can affect their ability to find employment afterward. This kind of social penalty naturally discourages people from starting businesses.

Even more importantly, the Japanese view of entrepreneurship is fundamentally different. In Japan, starting a business isn’t about chasing trends or making quick money—it’s about building a long-term, stable enterprise.

They value sustainability, a strong sense of responsibility for employees, and the ability to create social value. As such, they see entrepreneurship as a very serious life commitment—one that even carries more responsibility than marriage.

Therefore, in their eyes, to become an entrepreneur, one must possess four key abilities……

Abel, Berkshire’s vice chairman of non-insurance operations, was at Buffett’s side on stage when Buffett broke the news.

The 94-year-old has had a six-decade run at the company, and its annual meetings draw thousands of shareholders from around the world to Omaha each year. The gathering, known as “Woodstock for Capitalists,” is a chance for Buffett to share his views on the markets, investing and life, in general.

This year, Buffett was asked about global trade policy and the tariffs that President Donald Trump has proposed as well as the market’s recent volatility.

Here is how Berkshire Hathaway is preparing for leadership succession and addressing potential future challenges:

Addressing Future Challenges and Opportunities:

The shareholder meeting provided insight into how Buffett and Berkshire view current and future economic conditions and potential challenges:

U.S. Economy and "American Exceptionalism:

Buffett was asked about the future of the U.S. economy given what some perceive as "transformative" changes. He reaffirmed his strong belief in the long-term strength and resilience of the U.S. economy, stating that it has successfully navigated every historical challenge it has faced. He believes that the current changes are not a sign of decline but a continuation of the historical process of change. Buffett emphasized that the U.S. started from nothing and grew to possess nearly 25% of the world's GDP, considering it a "very lucky country" and expressing his own luck at being born there.

Trade Policy:

Global trade policy and tariffs were discussed as a topic of high interest. Buffett stated unequivocally that **"Trade should not be a weapon"**. He believes the U.S. should seek to trade with other countries, adding that more trade is better.

Investment Strategy (Japan)

Buffett affirmed Berkshire's investments in five Japanese trading houses, stating this move aligns perfectly with Berkshire's investment philosophy. **He regards these investments as performing "very successful[ly]" and plans to hold the stocks for 50 years or longer**. Berkshire currently has no short-term plans to sell these holdings and intends to further expand cooperation with these companies.

Cash Reserves:

As of March 31st, Berkshire Hathaway's cash reserves had increased to a record $347.7 billion. A registered public accountant noted this substantial cash position, suggesting Buffett "obviously knows something we don't know" because he is "hoarding cash". This large cash position could be seen as preparation for future investment opportunities or a hedge against potential economic uncertainty.

Real Estate and Interest Rates:

When asked about real estate and interest rates, Buffett expressed a general disinterest in real estate transactions compared to stocks due to their greater complexity and variables. He noted that real estate deals take longer to negotiate and often involve dealing with single owners for whom selling is a major decision. While Berkshire has made real estate investments, such as during the 2008-2009 financial crisis, Buffett advised approaching such investments with a "smarter, more strategic way to compare and choose".

Financial Performance (Q1 2024):

The company's first-quarter operating profit decreased by 14.1% year-over-year to $9.64 billion, with the insurance business cited as a contributing factor.

In summary, Berkshire Hathaway is actively addressing leadership succession with a clear plan for Greg Abel to take the helm. Regarding future challenges, the company maintains confidence in the long-term U.S. economic outlook, advocates for free trade, is committed to its successful long-term investments in Japan, holds substantial cash reserves, and approaches different asset classes like real estate with specific strategic considerations.

It argues that the fear of illness disrupting wealth accumulation drives their healthy eating choices, contrasting with others who engage in ineffective dieting cycles.

The ability to control appetite is linked to the self-discipline required for managing finances and leading others, distinguishing those who prioritize basic desires from those with higher aspirations.

Additionally, this highlights a social class divide in dietary habits: the wealthy consume smaller quantities of expensive, specialized healthy foods, prioritizing intelligent eating over mere satiation.

Elon Musk (Tesla, SpaceX): Known for a disciplined lifestyle, Musk reportedly follows a controlled diet with nutrient-dense foods like lean proteins and organic vegetables, reflecting his focus on efficiency and long-term health to sustain his demanding work schedule.

Jensen Huang (NVIDIA): Huang emphasizes high-quality, portion-controlled meals, often incorporating premium ingredients like wild-caught salmon and quinoa, aligning with his strategic approach to leadership and resource management.

Safra Catz (Oracle): Catz is said to favor tailored, health-conscious meals, such as plant-based dishes from exclusive wellness brands, showcasing the intersection of wealth, discipline, and intelligent consumption.

Satya Nadella (Microsoft): Nadella reportedly opts for balanced, minimalist meals, prioritizing organic and sustainably sourced foods, which mirrors his calculated decision-making in business and personal life.

The author explains the distribution of the coin and the lack of explicit investment guarantees, warning potential buyers about price volatility.

Furthermore, the coin outlines the ambiguous future plans for the coin, including virtual interactions and potential fan events.

Celebrity meme coins are cryptocurrencies tied to famous personalities, often launched on blockchains like Solana due to low fees and high liquidity. They derive value from hype, social media buzz, and the celebrity’s brand rather than intrinsic utility or technology, making them highly speculative and volatile.

Economic Drivers:

Hype and Attention: Celebrities leverage their fanbase to drive rapid price spikes. For example, the TRUMP meme coin hit a $70 billion market cap within days of launch, fueled by Donald Trump’s social media promotion. Similarly, Iggy Azalea’s MOTHER token reached $200 million.

FOMO and Speculation: Fear of missing out drives retail investors to buy early, often leading to short-term gains for insiders. Sahil Arora, a promoter, reportedly earned $5 million by manipulating celebrity token launches.

Community Engagement: Strong communities amplify hype via platforms like X and Telegram, but lack of sustained engagement often leads to crashes.

For Japanese residents, the twin pressures of inflation and a weakening yen are significantly affecting travel affordability.

Consumer prices continue to rise, with Japan’s core inflation rate hovering around 2.5% in early 2025, while the yen recently dipped to a 34-year low against the US dollar, trading at approximately ¥155 to $1.

These dynamics are putting strain on household budgets, prompting a widespread pullback from costly overseas vacations. According to the Japan Association of Travel Agents, outbound travel bookings for Golden Week have declined by roughly 18% compared to the previous year.

In contrast, domestic tourism is showing signs of resilience, though preferences are shifting. Shorter excursions, day trips, and local travel within one's own prefecture are gaining popularity, as people aim to limit expenses on accommodation and transportation.

On the other hand, Japan’s weakening currency is acting as a powerful magnet for international visitors.

With the yen down more than 20% from 2023 levels, tourists from countries with stronger currencies are finding Japan increasingly affordable. This has translated into a surge in inbound travel: the Japan National Tourism Organization (JNTO) reported that foreign arrivals during April surged to over 3.1 million visitors—a record high for the month—driven especially by tourists from South Korea, Taiwan, and the United States. The influx has pushed up demand for hotels and ryokan (traditional inns), with average nightly rates in major cities like Tokyo and Kyoto rising by 12–15% year-over-year.

This shifting landscape is creating a compelling opportunity for alternative lodging formats such as guesthouses and vacation rentals.

These accommodations, often more affordable than hotels, are especially appealing to younger travelers and families seeking budget-conscious options. Many offer added benefits like kitchenettes or full kitchens, allowing guests to prepare their own meals and reduce food costs—an increasingly attractive feature in the current inflationary environment.

Booking platforms such as Airbnb and Rakuten STAY have reported a 22% year-on-year increase in bookings for Golden Week, particularly in suburban or semi-rural areas that offer a mix of accessibility and authenticity.

In sum, the 2025 Golden Week is highlighting a clear bifurcation in Japan’s travel trends: domestic austerity meets international enthusiasm. As Japanese households trim expenses, foreign tourists are spending freely, buoyed by favorable exchange rates. The hospitality sector is rapidly adapting, with flexible, cost-effective lodging emerging as a critical growth area in response to the economic realignment.

If you've been shocked by sky-high hotel prices in Tokyo, you're not alone. Even budget business hotels are charging luxury rates, and five-star hotels are pricing rooms through the roof. While this was largely attributed to a surge in tourism and limited supply, there's now evidence of behind-the-scenes manipulation.

Japan's Fair Trade Commission (FTC) is preparing to issue warnings to 15 major Tokyo hotels for allegedly exchanging pricing and operational data—an act that could violate antitrust laws due to unfair competition. These top-tier hotels reportedly participated in a secretive group known as the "FR Group" (Front Reservation Group). This group held regular meetings to share confidential information like occupancy rates, current and planned pricing, and more—essentially coordinating to raise prices together, a practice known as forming a cartel.

This coordination allowed hotels to raise prices with confidence, knowing competitors wouldn’t undercut them. As a result, hotel prices in Tokyo have surged dramatically:

* From July to September 2024, the average price at 11 major hotels hit 15,537 yen per night, up 86.7% from 2021.

* Central Tokyo rates now easily exceed 20,000 yen, with seasonal peaks (like cherry blossom season) reaching 30,000–40,000 yen per night.

This is not an isolated incident in Japan. Similar price-fixing behavior has been found in other industries.

Key Highlights:

CRISLA Technology: Utilizes infrared lasers to selectively excite specific uranium isotopes, enabling efficient separation. This method is optimized for producing Low-Enriched Uranium (LEU) for current nuclear reactors and High-Assay Low-Enriched Uranium (HALEU) for next-generation reactors, including Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) and microreactors .​

Funding Milestones: In 2024, LIST closed an oversubscribed $11.88 million seed round and a 120% oversubscribed $22 million Series A funding round, attracting prominent investors such as 28 Ventures Fund, Innovating Capital, and Minetta Brook Capital .​

Strategic Collaborations: LIST has partnered with NANO Nuclear Energy Inc., which invested $2 million and entered into a strategic agreement for future fuel supply. This collaboration aims to advance LIST's laser enrichment technology and support the development of NANO's portable microreactors .​

Government Support: Selected by the U.S. Department of Energy as one of six companies in the Low-Enriched Uranium Enrichment Acquisition Program, LIST is eligible for task orders with a minimum value of $2 million each, contributing to a $3.4 billion initiative over ten years to bolster domestic nuclear fuel supply .​

Why Consider LIST:

With its unique, patented technology and strong backing from both private investors and government programs, LIST is positioned to play a significant role in the future of nuclear energy. Their advancements in laser enrichment could lead to more efficient and secure nuclear fuel production, addressing both current energy needs and future innovations in the sector.​

For more information, visit official website: laseristech.com

LIS Technologies Inc. (LIST) 是一家位於美國的公司，專門開發一種專利先進激光技術。他們利用紅外激光選擇性地激發目標同位素的分子的狀態，以將它們與其他同位素分離。這項技術被稱為激光同位素分離技術（L.I.S.T）。

LIS Technologies Inc. 的核心應用是激光濃縮 UF₆（六氟化鈾）。值得注意的是，他們是唯一源自美國（且擁有專利）的激光鈾濃縮公司。這項技術針對以下兩種用途進行了優化：

低濃縮鈾（LEU），用於現有的民用核反應堆。

高豐度低濃縮鈾（HALEU），用於下一代小型模塊化反應堆（SMRs）和微型反應堆。

除了鈾濃縮外，L.I.S.T 技術還有廣泛的應用範圍，包括生產用於醫學和科學研究的穩定同位素，以及應用於量子計算製造中的半導體技術。他們專利的技術具體名稱是冷凝抑制同位素選擇性激光活化（Condensation REPRESSION Isotope Selective Laser Activation）。

至於為什麼可能值得關注 LIS Technologies Inc.，有幾個方面：

獨特的技術與專利地位：擁有美國源自的專利激光技術，是唯一源自美國的激光鈾濃縮公司。這項激光濃縮技術被視為濃縮領域的「聖杯」（the “Holy Grail”），相較於第一代擴散法和第二代離心法，具有卓越的效率和成本效益。

技術優勢：與傳統方法（如氣體擴散和離心機）以及先前的激光濃縮嘗試相比，LIS的專有激光工藝具有多項主要優勢。它更節能，並且潛在具有高度競爭力的資本和運營成本。他們的技術被證明是可擴展、高效且具有成本競爭力的美國源自激光濃縮技術。

政府計畫參與：在 2024 年，LIS Technologies Inc. 被選為參與低濃縮鈾（LEU）採購計畫的六家國內公司之一。這項計畫總體撥款高達 34 億美元，合同期限最長為 10 年。每家獲獎公司將獲得至少 200 萬美元的合同。這顯示了政府對其技術和能力的認可，以及潛在的商業機會。

團隊和關係：公司擁有一支世界級的核技術團隊，與領先的核能企業家和行業專業人士合作。他們與政府和私營核工業界保持著牢固的關係。

總結來說，LIS Technologies Inc. 是一家利用專利激光技術進行同位素分離的公司，核心業務是為現有和下一代核反應堆提供鈾濃縮服務，同時也將技術應用於其他高科技領域。

他們憑藉其美國源自的專利技術、聲稱的效率和成本優勢，以及在政府計畫中的地位，在核燃料供應鏈和特定同位素應用領域具有獨特的地位。

The company operates primarily in the United States and is headquartered in New York, with a presence in Vancouver. Its flagship platform, SentimenTrader.com, is a cloud-based software solution offering proprietary research analytics, data, and tools, leveraging over 20 years of sentiment data, machine learning, and AI to deliver actionable insights for traders, particularly in North American equities and options markets.

Key Details:

* Business Overview: Aether develops tools that combine advanced data collection (via API calls and web scraping from sources like Bloomberg and the Chicago Board Options Exchange) with expert analysis to create proprietary indicators and reports. The platform aims to empower traders with data-driven strategies, supported by a team with decades of expertise in fintech, data analytics, and capital markets. The company recently launched Alpha Edge Media™ to expand its financial newsletters and subscriber base.

* Initial Public Offering (IPO): Aether went public on April 10, 2025, selling 1.8 million shares at $4.30 each, raising $7.74 million in gross proceeds (approximately $6.52 million net). The funds are earmarked for product development, workforce expansion (in finance, accounting, sales, marketing, and research), marketing initiatives, and general corporate purposes. The IPO was managed by The Benchmark Company and Axiom Capital Management.

* Leadership: The board includes experienced professionals like Nicolas Lin (with expertise in corporate finance and board roles at companies like Moxian, Inc.), and Justin Peter Molander, a Certified Public and Management Accountant with over 20 years in financial analysis and market research.assessments, platforms like InvestingPro are recommended.

For further information, you can visit Aether’s website (helloaether.com), check SEC filings at www.sec.gov, or explore real-time stock data on Nasdaq.com or Yahoo Finance.