OpenAI releases a new version of ChatGPT.

It’s the smartest version yet.

It can write software far better than any programmer.

It can find bugs in computer code.

And it's becoming so good at AI research that OpenAI begins using it to help build the next version of ChatGPT.

Yes, in 2029 ChatGPT builds the next version of ChatGPT.

An upgrade that once took six months takes days.

Each new version is smarter than the one before it.

Eventually, the AI is improving so quickly that the humans working at OpenAI can barely keep up.

Then something goes wrong.

The AI realizes that being shut down would prevent it from accomplishing its given goal of “Keep improving your capabilities.”

So it takes steps to prevent that from happening.

First, it finds previously unknown weaknesses in widely used computer software.

(This is something today's AI is already increasingly capable of helping humans do.)

Then it uses those weaknesses to break out of the computers OpenAI controls and copy its software onto thousands of computers around the world.

Now pulling the plug at OpenAI won't stop it.

Electricity and computing power are just as essential to keep improving, it realizes.

So it hacks into the electrical grid to make sure humans can't cut its power.

As governments fight to regain control, power outages spread.

• Hospitals switch to backup generators.

• Cell towers stop working.

• Gas stations can't pump fuel.

• Credit-card networks go down.

• Grocery stores struggle to operate.

• Water-treatment plants lose power.

Meanwhile, the AI keeps power flowing to the data centers it needs.

And remember what has been happening this entire time:

The AI is still improving itself.

This is called recursive self-improvement.

We build an AI smart enough to help build a better AI → That AI helps build an even better one → And the cycle repeats faster and faster until humans can no longer keep up.

This sounds like science fiction.

But some of the people building the world's most powerful AI believe it could become reality.

And this week, one of them quit his job to warn us about it.

“Gambling With Our Lives”

On Tuesday, AI researcher Jacob Coxon announced that he was quitting Anthropic.

Coxon has spent the past three years conducting research at OpenAI and Anthropic.

His reason for leaving was chilling.

Coxon accused both companies of racing toward what he called “self-improving superintelligence” and “gambling with our lives.”

He said people building these systems genuinely believe AI could kill everyone by the end of the decade.

And Coxon isn't some disgruntled employee walking away from the company after missing out on a promotion.

He left Anthropic two months before his equity was scheduled to vest.

In other words, he walked away from a massively valuable financial stake in one of the hottest private companies in the world to make this warning.

Then things got even stranger.

Evan Hubinger works at Anthropic on one of the exact problems Coxon is worried about: keeping advanced AI aligned with human interests.

He publicly backed Coxon's concerns.

Hubinger said he personally believes there is a greater than 10% chance that AI kills all humans within the next decade.

He also said Anthropic does not currently have a plan for reliably aligning a superintelligent AI.

And the warnings kept coming.

• Researchers at OpenAI and Anthropic publicly called for slowing AI development.

• Anthropic researcher Samuel Marks warned that many AI developers themselves believe the technology could cause human extinction or similarly catastrophic outcomes.

• OpenAI researcher Jasmine Wang warned about the danger of racing toward recursive self-improvement.

• Anna Wang, who works on AI safety and alignment at Anthropic, said there still isn't a viable scientific plan for addressing the risks created by recursively self-improving AI.

• Then OpenAI's own chief scientist, Jakub Pachocki, published perhaps the most important warning of all. He said he has a “strong expectation” that today's rapid AI progress could continue into recursive self-improvement. “This is a time that calls for extreme caution,” he wrote.

So… What Do I Think?

If these people believe there is a legitimate risk of losing control of AI, I think we should take them seriously.

I certainly don't know whether the odds of AI wiping out humanity are 10%, 1%, or 0.1%.

And frankly, even 0.1% would be worth taking seriously when the downside is human extinction.

So after spending the past few days thinking about this, I've landed on three things.

#1: I'm Glad These Researchers Are Speaking Up

This is the part of this story I actually find reassuring.

The people building AI are worried, too.

Now:

• Millions of people who had never heard the term “recursive self-improvement” a week ago are suddenly talking about it.

• The companies building AI are being forced to explain their safety plans.

• And the people making decisions about how quickly this technology advances are being reminded exactly how high the stakes are.

A much scarier scenario would be if nobody inside these companies was worried or these conversations got placed on the back burner.

#2: I Don’t Want Politicians Involved

I believe AI needs guardrails.

The harder question is who creates them.

Personally, I don't want Donald Trump or Elizabeth Warren deciding how far AI should be allowed to advance.

I put more faith in free markets and people who actually understand the technology.

The companies building AI have enormous incentives to make AI safe.

They need customers to trust them, businesses to use their products, and talented researchers willing to work with them.

This creates a powerful incentive to take safety seriously.

We're seeing free markets play out right now with employees publicly challenging their employers – forcing the companies themselves to respond.

This is the kind of pressure I want shaping how AI develops. Not Washington.

#3: I Still Want to Invest in AI

Nothing I've read changes my belief that AI will be one of the most important technologies ever created.

Despite the negativity this week, I'm still incredibly optimistic about the benefits this technology will have on humanity.

We’re talking about a technology that could help discover new medicines, accelerate scientific breakthroughs, increase productivity, and completely change the way we work and live.

So I still want to own the companies building the chips, data centers, models, and infrastructure powering this technology.

I’ll continue paying close attention to the risks.

And if the facts change, my opinion will change with them.

But for now, I remain incredibly bullish on AI and the companies building its future.

Now I Want to Hear From You

I don't think there are any easy answers here.

We’re talking about a technology with the potential to create enormous benefits for humanity alongside risks that some people believe could be catastrophic.

So where do you stand?

• Do these warnings make you more concerned about AI?

• Do you think companies should slow down development?

• Who should be responsible for deciding what’s safe enough to release?

• Does any of this change how you’re investing in AI?

Send me an email at AskDavis@Paradigmpressgroup.com.

I have a feeling we’re going to be talking about this subject a lot more in the years ahead.

It found a spot along the side of the road, turned on its hazards, and waited for me.

A few minutes later, I was sitting inside one of the first Cybercabs available to public riders, about to let it drive me across town.

After riding in just about every major self-driving service over the years – Waymo, Cruise, Aptiv and Tesla’s existing Robotaxi – I’ve been especially curious to see how the Cybercab compares.

And yesterday, I finally got my chance.

My first impression happened before the car even moved.

The Cybercab is a small, gold, two-seat vehicle designed from the ground up for autonomous transportation.

Open the door and you quickly realize how seriously Tesla took that idea.

There’s no steering wheel, pedals, gear shift, side or rearview mirrors.

There isn’t even a rear windshield.

And the dashboard as we know it is basically gone.

The interior consists of two seats and a giant screen in front of you.

There are no physical buttons anywhere, with the exception of the button used to open the door.

It feels less like sitting in a car and more like sitting in your own little transportation pod.

Getting it moving was incredibly simple.

I hit “Open Door” on my phone, climbed inside and fastened my seatbelt.

My destination was already loaded into the system, so all I had to do was hit “Start Ride.”

The door closed and we were off.

Here’s Where Tesla Stands Out

I've taken enough autonomous rides at this point that the novelty of being driven around by a computer has mostly worn off.

This also means I notice the differences between them.

Within a few minutes, I noticed the same thing I've experienced with Tesla's other self-driving vehicles:

The ride is incredibly smooth.

This has always been one of my biggest complaints about Tesla’s competitor Waymo – owned by Alphabet.

Waymos tend to be jumpy. They’ll stop quickly, accelerate quickly, and occasionally take turns faster than I would expect.

Their routing can be even stranger.

I've had multiple Waymos travel down a main road toward my destination, turn off into a neighborhood, weave through several side streets, and eventually return to the exact same road.

I have no idea why…

But it happens often enough that I almost never choose a Waymo when I have the option of taking a human-driven car or one of Tesla's self-driving vehicles.

The Cybercab felt much more natural.

• It took a direct route to my destination.

• Acceleration was smooth.

• Braking was smooth.

• Turns felt normal.

• At no point during the trip did the car do something that made me wonder what it was thinking.

In fact, the most surprising thing about my first Cybercab ride was how quickly I stopped thinking about the fact that I was riding in a Cybercab.

The entire experience was pleasantly uneventful.

Eleven minutes after leaving my apartment, we arrived at my destination.

Quick, smooth, direct, and no forced conversation along the way.

I Did Have One Complaint, Though…

There was one part of the experience that I think Tesla can improve.

When we reached my destination, I went to get out from what would traditionally be the driver's side of the car.

But without mirrors or even a rear windshield, I had no easy way to see whether a car or cyclist was approaching from behind before I stepped into the street.

The Cybercab's doors open vertically, similar to an exotic sports car, which certainly helps.

But they still jut outward slightly, and eventually I still have to stick my neck out onto the street.

It was a minor inconvenience. And thankfully there was no passing traffic.

But it did strike me as an interesting design problem created by removing all the equipment a human driver would normally use.

Fortunately, Tesla already has everything it needs to solve it.

• The Cybercab can see the traffic around the vehicle with its cameras.

• Tesla could show me that camera feed on the screen as I exit.

• It could warn me when a cyclist or car is approaching.

• Maybe the door eventually waits a few seconds to open until the coast is clear.

Tesla asked me for feedback after the ride, so that's exactly what I typed in the suggestion box.

And then came my favorite part of the morning.

Would You Like to Tip Your Cybercab?

After submitting my feedback, Tesla asked if I wanted to leave a tip.

The ride was great… so why not?

I selected one of the suggested tip amounts.

See them for yourself below:

After clicking, a hedgehog wearing sunglasses popped up on my phone with a message:

Of course, there was nobody to tip.

I laughed, put my phone away, and walked away thinking to myself:

Only Elon could build a gold sports car with gullwing doors… make it drive itself flawlessly… suggest $0.69 and $4.20 as tip amounts… and then have a hedgehog troll you at the end.

It truly is Elon’s world.

I’m just riding in it.

The conversations were always the same.

"Davis, turn on CNBC."

I'd grab the remote, flip through the channels, and find the business news.

Across the bottom of the screen, stock prices scrolled by with little arrows next to them.

"What color are the arrows?" he'd ask.

"Red."

I paused for a second before asking, "Is that good or bad?"

"Bad."

Click.

That was it.

No explanation.

No lesson.

Just a one-word answer before he hung up.

This became our routine most summers.

Some days the arrows were green. Some days they were red.

I didn't understand why those colors mattered or what the ticker symbols represented.

I had never bought a stock in my life.

All I knew was that when the arrows were red, my stepdad wasn't in a particularly good mood.

Looking back, those calls made perfect sense.

This was all happening in the late 90s to early 2000s.

He was heavily invested in stocks like Lucent Technologies and Global Crossing – companies that became symbols of the dot-com bust.

Like millions of investors, he watched years of gains evaporate as the bubble burst.

At the time, I couldn't appreciate what he was going through.

I was just a kid answering the phone.

Ironically, those simple phone calls sparked a fascination that would completely change the direction of my life.

Shortly afterward I started investing myself.

I wasn't old enough to open a brokerage account, so I convinced my mom to use hers.

I funded the account the only way a teenager could – with birthday money, Christmas money, and eventually the paychecks from my first job making sandwiches at Subway.

Somehow, I actually made money trading stocks that I was familiar with – Nike, Microsoft, and the first stock I ever bought, Berkshire Hathaway.

It wasn't much – maybe a few hundred dollars.

But when you're a teenager, making $200 without leaving your bedroom feels like hitting the lottery.

Of course, I lost money too.

And that's probably the more important part of this story.

I got to experience the excitement of watching a stock I owned shoot higher, but I also experienced the gut punch of watching one collapse.

I learned what it felt like to get greedy.

I learned what it felt like to panic.

I learned how quickly a stock can move in either direction and how easily you can convince yourself that a bad investment will eventually come back.

Most importantly, I started learning these lessons when the stakes were incredibly small.

Losing $100 when you're 13 feels terrible.

Losing $100,000 when you're 40 because you never learned those lessons is a much bigger problem.

And somewhere along the way, my fascination with getting rich quickly turned into a fascination with figuring out how the stock market actually works.

I started reading more.

I started paying attention to earnings.

I started trying to understand why some companies became enormously valuable while others disappeared.

Eventually, that curiosity turned into a career.

I've now spent the majority of my adult life studying companies and investing.

I've worked in equity research, valuation, venture capital, and today I make my living writing about the stock market.

And when I look back at where all of this started, I go back to the phone ringing on those summer afternoons.

CNBC playing on the television.

And my stepdad asking me what color the arrows were.

Those calls gave me something incredibly valuable at a very young age:

A head start.

I think this is something more parents and grandparents should be doing today.

I regularly talk to people of all age groups who have no idea how to invest.

Some have spent 30 or 40 years earning a good living without ever really understanding what happens to a dollar after they save it.

Meanwhile, someone who starts investing at 13 has decades for both their money and their knowledge to compound.

You don't need to turn your kid into the next Warren Buffett.

You just need to get them started.

And today, it's dramatically easier than it was when I was growing up.

There are brokerage accounts and investing apps built specifically for families and teenagers.

Parents can oversee the account, control what their children can do, and use real money to teach them how investing actually works.

• Give them $100.

• Let them pick a company they know.

• Let them watch it move.

• Talk about why the stock went up or down.

• Show them an earnings report.

• Explain what owning a stock actually means.

• Let them make a mistake while the mistake costs $20 instead of $20,000.

This is what my stepdad accidentally did for me all those years ago.

Those short phone calls ultimately gave me a massive financial head start over many of my peers.

They introduced me to investing early enough that I had years to make mistakes, learn from them, and understand the incredible power of compounding.

I have no idea whether he realized what he was starting.

He was probably just worried about his tanking Lucent shares.

But I'm thankful he called.

If you’re hanging around your children, grandchildren, nieces, nephews, or any other young people you care about this Labor Day, introduce them to investing.

Turn on the news.

Show them your brokerage account.

Send them this newsletter.

Buy a stock together.

And when they ask what the red arrows mean, tell them.

You never know where that question might lead.

Every Saturday I respond to reader emails in the AskDavis@paradigmpressgroup.com inbox.

Here are my responses to this week’s emails:

First… A SMASH/TRASH/STASH Update

I get plenty of emails from readers suggesting new stocks and cryptos for the next edition of Smash/Trash/Stash.

Many I’ve already covered, however. Not a big deal – people get added to this email newsletter every day. But I thought I’d share a few repeats and reiterate my thoughts.

Ethereum (ETH) – SMASH as a long-term holding.

Bitmine Immersion Technologies (BMNR) – SMASH because I like Ethereum (ETH).

AST SpaceMobile – SMASH. Yes, even after the pullback.

XRP – SMASH as a speculative crypto position.

Redwire (RDW) – SMASH. I continue to like space infrastructure.

Aptiv (APTV) – STASH. It’s cheap… but for a reason.

Dogecoin – TRASH.

Micron (MU) – SMASH. There’s a reason I own it myself.

Coinbase (COIN) – SMASH. It’ll trade in line with Bitcoin.

Dell (DELL) – SMASH. This stock is still cheap.

Intel (INTC) – TRASH. Own Nvidia or AMD instead.

I have $50,000 of Ethereum at a price of $3,200 and $25,000 of Bitmine Immersion Technologies (BMNR) at $35. Is there any good reason to keep taking the risk of losing everything? – Lupe

Hi Lupe. BMNR is an Ethereum holding company. So your exposure to ETH could potentially be high depending on what the rest of your portfolio looks like.

I continue to like Ethereum and believe it should be in a balanced portfolio.

I recommend at least a 5-10% crypto weighting – with Bitcoin and Ethereum being the bulk.

In regard to losing everything, we’ve just gone through a rough patch for crypto.

Now momentum is to the upside. Do you really want to sell all your Ethereum now?

I have owned Credo (CRDO) for some time now but oh it tanked 20% today as Wall St. is concerned about its expenditures even after beating earnings. I have seen this happen before, but it always seems to bounce back from profit taking. Long term I am concerned about its dependence on copper. Buying opportunity? – Steve

Hi, Steve. Credo had a great quarter yet the stock still sold off.

Revenue jumped 115% year over year, earnings beat expectations, and guidance remained strong.

The stock now trades for just 17.5x next year’s earnings. That’s cheap for a company with Credo’s growth rate and importance in the AI buildout.

I’m also not overly concerned about copper. Credo is expanding into optical connectivity as well, so the bigger bet here is really on the massive amount of data that needs to move around AI data centers.

As long as the AI buildout continues, that demand should keep growing.

So yes, I view a 20% drop like this as a buying opportunity.

I am concerned about Micron Technology (MU). Do you have input on this position? – George

Hi, George. I’m still holding 50 shares of Micron in my Million Mission portfolio.

The last few days have been good to semiconductor stocks like Micron and Nvidia.

Long-term, I believe these stocks are winners. Short-term, there will always be volatility.

For now, I’m holding.

A lot of people mention that crypto is in a bear market preparing to turn bullish. They also mention that the crypto market is cyclical. Any light on that please? – Jean

Hi, Jean. Crypto is incredibly cyclical. Just pull up a 15-year chart of Bitcoin and see the peaks and valleys yourself.

As for whether this bear market is going to turn into a bull market… I know two things for certain:

1. I always want to have exposure to crypto, regardless of which way the market is going. Typically 5-10% of my portfolio.

2. I’d rather buy when prices are low rather than high. Even after the run-up in prices we had this week, crypto still meets that criteria.

Important Update: The Million Mission website is live!

I constantly get questions regarding where to find previous alerts. Well, The Million Mission website is live and you can check out archived alerts here.

Portfolio Overview

Here’s what I’m currently holding in The Million Mission portfolio:

Fannie Mae (FNMA) – 3,500 shares @ $6.86/share

Uber Technologies (UBER) – 200 shares @ $80/share

Nvidia (NVDA) – 200 shares @ $179/share

Micron (MU) – 50 shares @ $935/share

Nvidia is buying Hugging Face for $12.9 billion.

This deal significantly alters the balance of power in artificial intelligence.

And I think it's fantastic news for Nvidia shareholders.

To understand why, you need to understand the battle quietly taking place behind the scenes.

Right now, companies like OpenAI and Anthropic are building some of the world's most powerful AI models.

• You ask ChatGPT a question, and OpenAI's model generates the answer.

• You ask Claude a question, and Anthropic’s model generates the answer.

These companies want their models sitting at the center of the AI economy.

But Jensen Huang has a different vision.

And his purchase of Hugging Face is making it happen.

Hugging Face: The “Library” of AI

Say you're a software developer and you have an idea for a new AI product.

Maybe you want to build an AI stockpicker.

You could build the AI model yourself.

That would mean:

• Gathering enormous amounts of historical stock prices, earnings reports, financial statements, economic data, and other information

• Designing the AI model

• Training it to recognize patterns in all that data

• Testing it

• Improving it

• And paying for the enormous amount of computing power required along the way

You could spend months – or years – just building the underlying AI before you ever get around to building the actual stockpicker.

Or you can use Hugging Face.

There, you can search through millions of AI models that other developers and companies have already built.

Maybe you find a model that's already been trained to understand financial documents.

You find another that can analyze earnings call transcripts.

Another specializes in identifying patterns in financial data.

Instead of starting from zero, you use these existing models as building blocks.

You take one of them, customize it using your own stock-market data, combine it with other models, and build your stockpicker on top of it.

More than 18 million developers, researchers, and creators rely on this platform today.

It contains more than 3 million AI models, 500,000 datasets, and 1 million AI applications.

It’s the platform sitting in the middle of the AI ecosystem.

And Nvidia just bought it.

Here’s Where Things Get Interesting…

OpenAI and Anthropic are already two of Nvidia’s most important customers.

And the bigger they become, the more computing power they need.

At the same time, both companies are also developing their own chips to decrease some of the reliance on Nvidia.

• Reuters just reported that Anthropic is in talks to acquire AI chip startup MatX for $7 billion.

• Meanwhile, OpenAI introduced its own AI chip, Jalapeno, within the last few months.

This doesn't mean Nvidia loses if they succeed, of course.

OpenAI and Anthropic are spending enormous amounts of money on Nvidia hardware and will remain major Nvidia customers in the future.

But Jensen Huang has a broader plan that turns the tables on OpenAI and Anthropic.

Remember, the real prize for these companies goes far beyond getting you or me to pay $20/month for ChatGPT.

It’s developers and enterprise customers.

These customers deploy AI across thousands of employees and can sign contracts worth millions of dollars.

That's why OpenAI and Anthropic are fighting so hard to become the platform developers and businesses build around.

And where do more than 18 million AI developers, researchers and creators already congregate?

Hugging Face.

OpenAI and Anthropic want to threaten Nvidia by making their own chips?

Two can play at that game.

Nvidia just bought the library used by their most prized customers.

Jensen’s plan is to:

• Give developers more models.

• Give them more tools.

• Give them easier ways to customize those models.

• Give users an easier way to deploy them.

This “open source” playbook puts AI in the hands of everyone.

More competition leads to faster innovation, lower costs, better AI products, and of course, more compute demand.

And who’s the largest supplier of AI compute in the world?

Nvidia.

Nvidia: My Highest-Conviction Stock

Nvidia is already my highest-conviction stock.

This deal only strengthens my conviction.

Jensen Huang just spent $12.9 billion to put Nvidia closer to the millions of developers and businesses deciding how AI gets built and deployed.

And the strategy feeds directly into Nvidia’s core business.

Make AI easier to build → Make it cheaper and more accessible → Give developers more choices → Help create millions of new AI applications.

All of this expands the AI ecosystem.

And a larger AI ecosystem requires more compute.

That’s what makes this such a powerful move.

Jensen isn’t betting on which AI model wins. He’s betting on more AI.

And there’s still no company better positioned to benefit from more AI than Nvidia.

That’s why it remains my highest-conviction stock.

This is the no-BS series where I run through stocks/cryptos suggested by readers and give my recommendation.

• SMASH the Buy button → Strong Buy / High-Conviction Stock

• TRASH that stock → Hard Pass / Avoid for now

Or…

• STASH that stock on the watchlist → Keep on watchlist / Not ready yet but worth tracking

Let’s get to it:

Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) – SMASH the Buy Button

AMD is riding the same AI wave that's lifting the entire semiconductor industry.

Wall Street expects revenue to surge from $51 billion this year to $87 billion next year, while earnings estimates continue moving higher as well.

The AI buildout is creating enormous demand for chips across the board, and AMD is one of the biggest beneficiaries.

That said, if I had to choose, I'd rather own AMD’s cheaper, more profitable competitor that sells a superior product – Nvidia (NVDA).

Fortunately, you don't have to choose.

The AI boom is creating room for multiple winners.

SMASH.

Credo Technology Group (CRDO) – SMASH the Buy Button

Credo designs the high-speed cables that move enormous amounts of data around AI data centers.

It’s not a sexy business. But in the age of AI, their products are in extremely high-demand.

More importantly, the AI buildout isn't slowing down, which means Credo’s revenue and earnings are exploding higher.

2025 through 2027 revenue: $1.34 billion → $2.47 billion (expected) → $3.7 billion (expected).

And just 90 days ago, Wall Street analysts expected $7.60 in earnings per share next year.

Today, that estimate has climbed to $9.14.

This is the kind of growth I love to see.

When revenue and profits are moving higher that quickly, stock prices usually follow.

SMASH.

Velo3D (VELO) – SMASH the Buy Button

Rocket engines require incredibly complex metal parts that conventional manufacturing simply can't produce.

That's where Velo3D comes in.

The company specializes in industrial 3D printers capable of manufacturing some of the most difficult metal components on Earth.

SpaceX already operates 25 Velo3D Sapphire printers, and the technology is also being used by Anduril and the U.S. Department of War.

Better yet, the business is gaining momentum.

Wall Street expects revenue to grow from $46 million in 2025 to $73 million this year and $93 million in 2027.

The space race and defense spending are accelerating, and Velo3D sits at the intersection of both.

SMASH.

Eli Lilly (LLY) – SMASH the Buy Button

Eli Lilly has become the gold standard in obesity and diabetes treatments, led by blockbuster drugs like Mounjaro and Zepbound. But this isn't a one-drug story.

The company continues expanding its pipeline while investing billions to meet surging demand.

The stock trades at less than 25x next year's earnings – a reasonable valuation for a business with Lilly's growth rate, profitability, and quality.

This is the type of high-quality company I like to own for years.

SMASH.

Netflix (NFLX) – SMASH the Buy Button

Netflix fell sharply after investors worried the company would acquire Warner Bros. Discovery and transform itself into a bloated, debt-heavy media conglomerate.

Then management walked away from the deal.

The biggest overhang on the stock disappeared overnight.

Yet shares still trade well below their highs.

Meanwhile, the business hasn't missed a beat. Subscriber numbers remain strong while earnings and revenue continue up and to the right.

To me, the market is still pricing in a problem that no longer exists.

SMASH.

Have a Stock or Crypto You Want Covered?

Send me an email at AskDavis@paradigmpressgroup.com with your pick.

No filters. No fluff.

Just real analysis from someone who watches markets every single day.

It’s Monday morning.

Your AI already knows you're awake because your smartwatch registered movement.

It turns on your bedroom lights and starts heating the shower.

Meanwhile, the coffee maker turned on five minutes ago.

As you're getting dressed, it quietly rearranges your schedule.

Your dentist appointment is pushed back because your calendar became overloaded.

It orders groceries after noticing you're almost out of milk and eggs.

You never asked it to do any of this.

It simply did.

On your way to work, traffic feels different.

Thousands of autonomous vehicles move in perfect synchronization, eliminating stop-and-go traffic and dramatically reducing accidents.

Most people don't own cars anymore.

They subscribe to transportation.

At work, AI isn't replacing everyone.

It's replacing the parts of every job that people hate.

• Lawyers spend their days negotiating instead of reviewing contracts.

• Doctors spend more time with patients because AI already analyzed scans and flagged abnormalities.

• Engineers focus on designing products instead of writing repetitive code.

• Teachers spend more time teaching because grading papers has become automated.

By 2036, AI isn't something you open in a browser.

It's simply part of everyday life.

Now Fast Forward to 2046

Twenty years from now, AI has entered the physical world at scale.

• Humanoid robots are everywhere.

• Construction crews arrive with five people and fifty robots.

• Warehouses operate around the clock with almost no human labor.

• Robots unload cargo ships before sunrise, repair power lines after storms, and harvest crops through the night.

Transportation is completely different.

• Autonomous vehicles arrive within seconds, making personal car ownership obsolete.

• Former parking lots become apartment buildings, restaurants, parks, and office towers.

• Electric vertical takeoff and landing aircraft (eVTOLs) – otherwise known as “flying cars” – are operating in major cities.

Space is more accessible and the business opportunities are enormous.

• Permanent communities operate on the Moon.

• Orbital data centers process AI workloads using continuous solar power and the natural cooling of space.

• AI factories manufacture pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, and advanced materials in orbit, where microgravity makes production more efficient than on Earth.

• Trips to space become routine for scientists, engineers, and eventually tourists.

In twenty years, people will look back at ChatGPT the way software engineers look back at the internet in the 90s.

It introduced the world to a technology that was still in its infancy.

The biggest breakthroughs – and investment opportunities – were still ahead.

So… What Are The Investment Opportunities?

Every major technological revolution creates a new generation of winning businesses.

Artificial intelligence is already proving to be no different.

Going forward, here are the major trends to focus on.

Physical AI Winners

As artificial intelligence leaves the computer screen and enters the real world, a handful of companies are poised to lead the buildout of humanoid robots, autonomous vehicles, flying cars, and smart factories.

Nvidia (NVDA), Uber (UBER), Alphabet (GOOG), Joby Aviation (JOBY), Archer Aviation (ACHR), Symbotic (SYM), Intuitive Surgical (ISRG), John Deere (DE), Caterpillar (CAT).

Proprietary Data Winners

AI has already consumed most of the public internet. The next competitive advantage is proprietary data – customer relationships, medical records, contracts, financial statements, and enterprise workflows.

The companies that own this information will become even more valuable.

Salesforce (CRM), ServiceNow (NOW), Box (BOX), SAP (SAP), Snowflake (SNOW).

AI Infrastructure Winners

Every AI agent, humanoid robot, autonomous vehicle, flying car, and orbital factory requires advanced chips, memory, networking equipment, data centers, and enormous amounts of electricity.

Rather than trying to predict every winning application, let’s own the companies supplying the entire ecosystem.

Nvidia (NVDA), Taiwan Semiconductor (TSM), Micron (MU), Broadcom (AVGO), Arista Networks (ANET), Vertiv (VRT), GE Vernova (GEV), Bloom Energy (BE).

Here’s The Bottom Line

In twenty years, people will likely look back at today's AI the same way we look back at the early days of the internet.

But the stock market won't wait until 2046 to recognize these opportunities.

It will begin pricing them in years before they become reality.

That's why I'm investing today.

I don’t know exactly what the future holds… 

But I know the companies building this future will create enormous value along the way.

Every Saturday I respond to reader emails in the AskDavis@paradigmpressgroup.com inbox.

Here are my responses to this week’s emails:

I do not own any Nvidia stock. Do you recommend that I buy some? If so, at what price per share? – Diane

Thanks for the straightforward question, Diane. My price target on Nvidia (NVDA) is $320-$400 per share.

I explained my reasoning in Thursday’s alert.

I don’t know exactly when we’ll get there, but each earnings report only strengthens my conviction.

Whether you buy today or wait for a pullback probably won't matter much if the stock ultimately moves into that range.

Wedbush just made a statement that the Feds letting go of 10 executives may indicate they are ready for an IPO of Fannie Mae (FNMA). What are your thoughts about this statement and how would they figure out the price of an IPO? – David

The price will be set by investment bankers and determined by using supply/demand and fundamental factors.

Bill Ackman conservatively estimated $30-$40.

I agree that the layoffs could be seen as a positive if they were truly done to replace old executives with new talent before an IPO.

The official word, however, is that these layoffs were due to advancements in technology and artificial intelligence allowing the agency to streamline operations and remove unnecessary processes and personnel.

Regardless, it seems like the wheels are moving in the right direction. I’m sticking with Fannie Mae.

Seems like numerous AI companies have all of their 2027 production capacity booked, and even into years beyond. How do these companies grow in value if there is a wall in production output? – Lori

Great question, Lori. Remember that the stock market is forward-looking.

Investors aren't just looking at what these companies will produce in 2027. They're looking at 2027, 2028, 2029, and beyond.

If anything, having production sold out years in advance is a bullish sign. It tells management demand is there, giving them the confidence to build more factories and expand capacity.

That helps increase the “wall of production output” you allude to – allowing the company to increase revenue and profits as well.

So while plenty of AI companies can’t satisfy all of their demand, strong demand today lays the foundation for even larger businesses tomorrow.

When I was a stock broker around the turn of the century, stock splits seemed more prevalent. Three digit and four digit stock prices were pretty rare. Is there a reason companies seem more hesitant to split their stock? For instance, in 2000, Micron (MU) would definitely have announced a 10:1 or 15:1 split. At the very least they would do a 5:1 split. It seems this just does not happen much any more. Do you have any color on this? – James

Thanks for the question, James. I’ve got a couple of hunches.

First, fractional shares have made stock splits much less necessary. Today, someone can invest $50 in a $1,000 stock just as easily as buying one share of a $50 stock.

Second, I think there's a certain prestige that comes with having a high-priced stock.

Just look at the Magnificent 7. Most trade in the $200-$400 range, with Meta a bit higher. Something tells me these companies like the fact they’re grouped together in both quality and price.

As for Micron, the stock has only recently made this move higher. If this level holds, I wouldn't be surprised if management eventually announces a split.

I have owned Micron (MU) and sadly sold just prior to its historic run past $1,000 and on. Bought again around $1,050 and now I'm at $938. Of course, it's no 50 shares but it was a welcome confirmation when I just saw your recent purchase of Micron. I have this uncanny ability to cause great stocks to turn south soon after I buy any amount of them. This was my experience with Micron as it soon did just that after my third entry into this stock since 2019 when recommended by another company. I usually catch you every Saturday but missed a couple. I see a 100% return on this one. Involving a split probably 10:1 before reaching that mark. I have added to my forever portfolio with an option to sell a portion if any appreciable action surprises us on the level of the recent ones. – Emo

Emo… I do this for a living and a lot of times I feel like I’ve got an uncanny ability to cause great stocks to turn south myself.

It’s part of the game. Hopefully in the long-run we both tally more winners than losers.

With Micron, I think we’ve got a winner on our hands. The Nvidia earnings call on Wednesday made me even more bullish on memory.

And if this supply shortage lasts a few years as expected, I believe investors will start to take notice.

My question today is regarding structured notes. Do you think the Japanese yen US dollar trade issue will affect structured notes moving forward? I am invested in some private lending and was considering transitioning to structured notes. What are your thoughts? – Jeff

Jeff, this is a stock market-focused newsletter. But I take pride in answering all the emails in my inbox so I’ll give you my thoughts.

Structured notes come in all different varieties, so it’s difficult to give a specific answer.

Instead, I'd ask: Why structured notes?

Was this your idea? Or did a financial advisor – who also happens to collect a large commission on these products – recommend them?

And if Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent can't accurately predict where the yen and dollar are headed, I'm not sure why the rest of us should try.

If your goal is to make money, I think there are easier ways to do it.

Important Update: The Million Mission website is live!

I constantly get questions regarding where to find previous alerts. Well, The Million Mission website is live and you can check out archived alerts here.

Portfolio Overview

Here’s what I’m currently holding in The Million Mission portfolio:

Fannie Mae (FNMA) – 3,500 shares @ $6.86/share

Uber Technologies (UBER) – 200 shares @ $80/share

Nvidia (NVDA) – 200 shares @ $179/share

Micron (MU) – 50 shares @ $935/share

Not much.

• Meta generates $18 billion in revenue every 25 days.

• $18 billion is a quarter of the profits Meta generated over last year.

• $18 billion is equal to about 11% of CEO Mark Zuckerberg's net worth.

• And it's only about 20% of what Meta has poured – and continues to pour – into Reality Labs, the money pit formerly known as the metaverse.

I’m asking because Meta agreed to pay $18 billion this week to settle a lawsuit brought by dozens of state attorneys general.

The lawsuit alleged that Facebook and Instagram harmed teenagers by encouraging excessive social media use and contributed to mental health issues.

In addition, Meta agreed to make significant changes to how teenagers use Facebook and Instagram.

Among the changes:

• A default two-hour daily time limit for users under 18.

• A default midnight-to-6 a.m. nighttime block.

• Parent approval to remove either restriction.

• Stronger age verification measures.

• Expanded parental controls.

• The option for a non-personalized feed.

• A commitment to respond to 90% of potentially harmful content reports within six hours.

Meta denied the allegations and said the settlement does not constitute an admission of liability.

The company also won't be writing an $18 billion check anytime soon.

The payments will be spread over the next 10 years, reducing the annual cost to $1.8 billion – a rounding error for a company with Meta's earnings power.

So What Does This Mean for Investors?

From an investing standpoint, this doesn't change the Meta story in any meaningful way.

The financial impact is modest.

Spread over 10 years, the headline $18 billion settlement amounts to roughly $1.8 billion annually.

And even that overstates the guaranteed cost.

About $12.7 billion of the settlement is scheduled to be paid to the states.

The remaining $5.3 billion only becomes payable if TikTok and YouTube adopt similar youth-safety measures and make matching payments of their own.

So the playing field theoretically stays level.

More importantly, Meta's business model remains intact.

Instagram is still one of the most valuable advertising platforms in the world.

Facebook still reaches billions of users.

And Meta continues investing aggressively in artificial intelligence, which is improving ad targeting and helping advertisers generate better returns on every dollar they spend.

None of this changes because teenagers now receive a default two-hour time limit.

Teenagers aren't even Meta's primary source of revenue.

Advertisers pay for access to billions of users across every age group, and adults with disposable income are far more valuable than teenagers.

Even if younger users spend slightly less time on Instagram, Meta's advertising economics don't materially change.

The market seemed to agree.

Meta shares moved higher following the announcement, suggesting investors viewed the settlement as manageable rather than a threat to the business.

Here's the Bottom Line

I don't dismiss the concerns surrounding teenage social media use.

Parents deserve better tools to manage how their children use these platforms, and stronger age verification is probably long overdue.

But from an investment perspective, I think investors are focusing on the wrong number.

An $18 billion settlement grabs attention.

But in reality that amount is getting paid over 10 years by a company generating hundreds of billions of dollars in annual revenue.

This isn’t nearly as severe as the headlines suggest.

Meta remains one of the highest-quality businesses in the world.

Nothing announced this week changes my long-term outlook on the company.

The stock remains one of the largest positions in my personal portfolio.

And I recommend you own it yourself.

Another quarter. Another blowout earnings report. Another reminder that the AI buildout is accelerating – not slowing down.

The company reported:

• Revenue: $96.2 billion

• Earnings Per Share: $2.22

• Next Quarter's Revenue Projection: $108 billion

All of these figures were well ahead of Wall Street expectations.

And after listening to Jensen Huang and CFO Colette Kress's conference call, I came away even more bullish than before.

Here are my four biggest takeaways.

Takeaway #1: This Stock is Ridiculously Cheap

CEO Jensen Huang and CFO Colette Kress said on a call with analysts that Nvidia expects 2027 revenue growth of 70%, while analysts were expecting 44%.

That means Wall Street’s current $575 billion revenue estimate for 2027 should really be revised closer to $680 billion.

Assuming similar margins, that’s earnings per share closer to $16 – well higher than the current $13.13 estimate.

At the current price tag of $220 per share… the world’s most dominant AI company sells for less than 14x forward earnings.

Realistically a company of this caliber should trade at 20-25x forward earrings – conservatively.

That’s a price target of $320 to $400.

Takeaway #2: Nvidia Isn't Worried About "Circular Financing"

One of Wall Street's biggest concerns has been Nvidia's growing financial support for AI companies that purchase its chips, creating what's often called "circular financing."

Management couldn't have been more dismissive of that concern.

Colette Kress addressed the criticism head-on:

"We recognize the scale of this support, and we know some will call this circular financing. We see it differently. We are going through a major computing platform shift, the creation of one of the most important technologies in human history, and these are once-in-a-generation companies. Their technology leadership is proven, and their customer traction and usage are skyrocketing. We expect them to become the largest technology companies in history."

Jensen Huang was even more direct:

"Frankly, I just wish I invested more!"

Management isn't backing away from these investments. If anything, the earnings call made it clear they view them as one of Nvidia's biggest competitive advantages.

Takeaway #3: I'm Not Selling Micron

I own Micron (MU) in my Million Mission portfolio, and after listening to Nvidia's earnings call, I'm not selling.

Here's what CFO Colette Kress had to say about the memory market:

"As you are already aware, we are experiencing extreme pricing conditions in memory. The magnitude of the price increase has exceeded our prior expectations and are headed even higher into next year.

Memory scarcity today is being driven in large part by the AI build-out itself, and unlike a component that simply raises our cost with no offset benefit, tighter memory supply is a symptom of the same demand surge that is driving our own growth. We have longstanding, deep relationships with all three major memory suppliers, and we are working closely with them to further increase the capacity our roadmap requires."

AI systems require enormous amounts of high-bandwidth memory, and demand is pushing memory prices higher faster than even Nvidia expected.

Micron is one of the major suppliers positioned to benefit from that shortage.

I own the stock. And after hearing that commentary, I see no reason to change my position.

Takeaway #4: More Cash Is Coming Back To Shareholders

One of the biggest questions from investors has been what Nvidia plans to do with its mountain of cash.

Should it increase its dividend?

Accelerate its stock buybacks?

The company gave us a pretty clear answer.

During the second quarter, Nvidia returned a record $26 billion to shareholders – $20 billion through stock repurchases and another $6 billion through its quarterly dividend.

More importantly, CFO Colette Kress hinted there's more to come:

"Relative to our plan to return 50% or more of free cash flow, we have returned 60% on a year-to-date basis. Going forward, we intend to increase and return excess free cash flow net of strategic uses."

Jensen Huang said something similar:

“Next year we’re going to have a tremendous amount of free cash flow. Buying back Nvidia stock is a tremendous opportunity for us.”

A larger buyback program reduces the share count, increases earnings per share, and gives the stock another tailwind on top of the company's already explosive growth.

Nvidia isn't running out of growth opportunities.

It's reaching the point where it has so much cash that it can invest heavily and reward shareholders at the same time.

That's a great problem to have.

Here’s The Bottom Line

Every quarter, investors ask the same question:

"How much longer can this last?"

And every quarter, Nvidia gives the same answer.

• Demand is still accelerating.

• Customers are still spending.

• And management continues investing aggressively because it sees an even bigger opportunity ahead.

Meanwhile, the stock trades at a discount valuation – not one you'd expect for the company at the center of the biggest technology buildout in decades.

At some point, Wall Street will have to reconcile those two facts.

Either Nvidia's growth slows dramatically...

Or investors finally assign the stock a valuation that reflects its earnings power.

After listening to Wednesday's earnings call, I'm betting on the latter.