the more I reread this post, the more I become convinced this is NVIDIA's manifesto of becoming the "central bank of compute." some thoughts on this econ model + nvidia's role: > econ101 tells us a central bank has several goals - (1) anchor inflation, (2) full employment/utilization, (3) lender of last resort. Commercial banks on the other hand "create money" in the economy by lending and thus increasing GDP > the loan in GPU financing world is datacenter buildout (of NVIDIA factories), the "GDP growth" is essentially token/inference spend. The primary "commercial banks" are neoclouds (Coreweave, Nebius et al.) that contract with the labs/inference platforms, which manufacture tokens and allow for "GDP growth". This is the first layer of compute. Lets call it C1. > in addition to directly "lending" to the giants as C1, wholesale compute can also get unbundled into PAYG/short-term duration markets. this is the whole "GPU marketplace layer" - the world of SF compute/Vast AI/compute exchange that sell bare metal. We can call this C2 > all the orderbooks on C1 and C2 can then get bundled into a bunch of synthetic financialization tools on the outside layer, which we can label as C3. Indexes, cash-settled exchanges, residual puts, insurance stuff all belong here. so why is nvidia a central bank? going back to econ101 - (1), the "inflation" in compute land is actually depreciation curves. NVIDIA can control the depreciation curve by deciding when to release a new series of chips (eg. Vera Rubin). (2) NVIDIA's goal is to enable full utilization in the economy of their GPUs (which spurs more demand + higher prices etc.) and so will let the financing stack go faster. (3) NVIDIA has the balance sheet and resources to "bail" failing neoclouds/marketplaces out that don't see the inference demand growth as the lender of last resort. this is where the 25% underwriting comes from.