Our CEO Jensen Huang is LIVE at #NVIDIAGTC Berlin. Watch the keynote now ⬇️ youtube.com/live/PvFjbPYEOZI…

AI builders need computing capacity they can put to work sooner. We introduced DSX POD at NVIDIA GTC Berlin: AI factories integrated and tested before delivery, enabling deployment at prepared sites in as little as 14 days.

this California wealth tax thing is just incredible. so in October 2025, a California healthcare union proposed a "one time" 5% tax on any billionaire's wealth. the ballot measure will be voted on next month. In early December 2025, California announced that it would be a retroactive tax if passed, applying to anyone with CA residency as of Jan 1, 2026. The objective is to pay for Medi-Cal, California's incredibly dysfunctional healthcare system. (which also functions as a glorified welfare apparatus, but that's a discussion for another time). polls reveal that the CA electorate is split around 50/50 on the tax, but prediction markets only give Prop 40 a ~23% chance of passing (there are competing measures on the ballet that would nullify it). there are 200 billionaires in CA, worth collectively somewhere between $2.3 and $2.6 trillion. 5% of that is around $100b, accounting for a small amount of attrition. proponents of the tax forecasted a significant windfall, assuming only a 10% departure rate. supporters thought they were being clever with the retroactive concept. no billionares would leave CA in the few short months between the tax being proposed and the residency cutoff date, without the tax even having passed yet, right? well as it turns out, they did. a new paper [1] from two academics at Stanford called "The Net Present Value of the California Billionaire Tax Act", argues that not only did more billionaires leave due to the proposed tax than its proponents expected, but that the value of the tax, if it does pass, is actually negative. proponents of the tax only assumed 10% avoidance, that is, only 10% of the taxable base of targeted billionaires would leave CA within the very short Oct-Dec 2025 window. Jaros and Rauh, the Stanford academics, find that a lower bound of 28.6% of the taxable base managed to leave. just based on known departures, those departures total $577b in net worth, or $28.8b in potential tax lost. this of course does not capture everyone (many left without announcing their departure), so the authors normalize to departure rates estimated from other wealth tax events, and apply other discounts for litigation, arriving arrive at a figure of only $28-$36b in forecasted tax revenues. but this isn't all! all of the income taxes paid by the departed billionaires are also forsaken. the authors estimate that CA billionaires pay $3.3- 5.8b in annual income taxes. they assume a midpoint of $2b lost in annual collections from departed billionaires. the net present value of that lost income stream is -$68.9 billion. so when you add it all up you get: + $30b one-time tax windfall (estimated) - $69b in present value of lost future income taxes = - 38.9b overall net present value of the tax of course, this analysis is highly estimate driven. the authors simulate the parameters 100k times and find a negative NPV of the implemented tax 85 percent of the time. and if the tax doesn't pass, which it's not looking like it will, California still ended up losing at least $577b in departed net worth, and they have permanently poisoned the well with entrepreneurs who will now worry about future wealth taxes. [1]: nber.org/system/files/workin…

Anthropic’s proposed AI safety bill only kicks in if 50 deaths or $1 billion in damages are on the line tomshardware.com/tech-indust…

Last year I thought Threads was an existential risk to X. When Meta puts its full weight behind something -- by injecting the app into Instagram, it’s DEFCON 5: You have to squeeze out every last drop of growth from all available surfaces to save the app. However, I started to realize that the opposite was happening: It was strengthening X. If you look at any announcement by Zuck, you will see the most rude & toxic comments on the internet. But when he makes those same announcements on X, people are thrilled about how he’s pushing humanity forward. X is a place where people are excited about the future, so it’s no surprise he and his top lieutenants are using it more than their own app. Threads — and Bluesky — have effectively quarantined some of the worst people on the internet. And so I had an epiphany: those apps are X’s anti-abuse systems.

"New OpenAI."

Working on it lifespan.com/blogs/magazine/…

BREAKING: Palantir, $PLTR, CTO has said that some AI researchers are taking up smoking because they expect AI to cure cancer

Why do Great Danes live half as long as Chihuahuas? Can we make dogs live significantly longer? New study in Science indicates the answer may lie in the epigenome 🧵

BREAKING: AI companies are privately predicting a catastrophic AI-driven event is highly possible within the next 6 to 12 months, per YF

Effective November 12th, 2026, abusive behavior towards Claude will be a violation of Anthropic's Usage Policy.

Three Falcon rockets vertical at three of our launch pads in Florida and California → spacex.com/launches

Jensen Huang: don’t mistake engineering vocabulary for evidence of a machine mind. AI is still software, not a human mind inside a machine. "We can't make jokes about all this stuff, we're scaring the American public." Words like “spawn,” “parent,” “child,” and “kill” have existed in computing for decades; Giving those same mechanisms human characteristics today because of AI is unnecessary and misleading. ---- From "The Ezra Klein Show + New York Times Opinion + New York Times Podcasts" YouTube channel, (full video link in comment)