 |
|
|
|||||
A momentous week in the technology sector made it clear there is no sign the boom in building artificial intelligence infrastructure is slowing despite the bubble talk. Nvidia, whose processors are the AI revolution’s backbone, became the first company to surpass $5 trillion in market value. Microsoft and OpenAI inked a deal enhancing the ChatGPT maker’s fundraising ability and OpenAI promptly started laying groundwork for an initial public offering that could value the company at $1 trillion. Amazon said it would cut 14,000 corporate jobs, just days before its cloud unit posted its strongest growth in nearly three years. These developments, along with numerous earnings calls and interviews with executives, make clear that AI has cemented itself as the single biggest catalyst for global corporate investment and the engine of the market rally, even as some question the sustainability of both. Spending without ending Soaring revenue at Microsoft, Alphabet, and other technology giants was expected. But more than 100 non-tech global companies noted data centers on quarterly calls this week, including Honeywell, turbine maker GE Vernova, and heavy equipment maker Caterpillar. Sales in Caterpillar’s division that supplies data centers jumped 31% in its most recent quarter. “We’re definitely really excited about the prime power opportunity with data centers,” CEO Joseph Creed said this week. The AI supply chain now spans power, industrials and cooling technology, and investors are looking at the entire ecosystem rather than just core tech,” said Ayako Yoshioka, portfolio manager at Wealth Enhancement Group. Goldman Sachs estimates global AI-related infrastructure spending could reach $3 trillion to $4 trillion by 2030. Microsoft, Amazon, Meta, and Alphabet are expected to spend roughly $350 billion combined this year. AI investment is propping up global trade, with about 60% of U.S. data-center capex spent on imported IT equipment, according to Oxford Economics, much of it semiconductors from Taiwan, South Korea and Vietnam. At least two dozen companies representing more than $21 trillion in combined market value reported quarterly earnings or spoke with Reuters about AI in recent days. Many, including Procter & Gamble and Boliden, noted that the hoped-for productivity gains, though uneven, are beginning to show. “We strongly believe the future contribution of artificial intelligence within R&D, within developing innovation, will steadily increase,” Schindler CEO Paolo Compagna told Reuters, though he said AI’s impact is yet to be seen. The Swiss lift and escalator maker raised its annual margin forecast last week. Year-over-year revenue growth in the U.S. tech sector is up more than 15%, outpacing all other sectors, according to LSEG data. Apple said it was significantly increasing AI investment and Amazon projected capital spending of $125 billion in 2025. Worries about overvaluation Since ChatGPTs debut in 2022, global equity values have climbed 46%, or $46 trillion. One-third of that gain has come from AI-linked companies, according to Bespoke Investment Group. Analysts warn of a quickening replacement cycle for servers, accelerators and chips as each new generation delivers exponential performance gains. The useful life of AI chips is shrinking to five years or less, forcing companies to write down assets faster and replace them sooner,” said UBS semiconductor analyst Tim Arcuri. The surge in AI-related spending has widened the gap between investment and returns, with a Reuters analysis showing that sales-to-capex ratios at major tech firms have fallen sharply as outlays on chips and data centers grow faster than revenue. Capital expenditures represent a larger chunk of cash generated by operating activities for some companies, causing some investor concern. If progress hasnt been made toward monetization within three years, the market will start asking hard questions,” said Sumali Sanyal, senior portfolio manager at investment firm Xponance. Microsoft reported a record $35 billion in capex in its most recent quarter and projected higher spending, prompting Bernstein analyst Mark Moerdler to ask whether the company was spending into a bubble. Microsoft Chief Financial Officer Amy Hood responded that AI-related demand still outpaces Microsoft’s spending. “I thought we were going to catch up. We are not,” she said. Some companies are financing AI projects with debt. Oracles $18 billion bond sale last month was one of the largest ever for a tech company, and it looks set to be surpassed by an up to $30 billion bond sale from Meta Platforms. News of its largest ever bond sale knocked Meta’s shares down 11% on Thursday. Still, many economists say the AI cycle is far from exhausted. Goldman estimates AI investment is currently less than 1% of U.S. GDP, far below peaks of 2% to 5% seen during the electricity and dot-com booms. We are in the early innings and the pace of AI innovation is the fastest we have seen in decades, said Nick Evans, portfolio manager at Polar Capital Technology Trust. Akash Sriram, Sriparna Roy, Sneha SK, Puyaan Singh, Jessica DiNapoli, and Bernadette Hogg
Category:
E-Commerce
The day after the jewelry heist at the Louvre in Paris, officials from across Washington’s world-famous museums were already talking, assessing and planning how to bolster their own security.“We went over a review of the incident,” said Doug Beaver, security specialist at the National Museum of Women in the Arts, who said he participated in Zoom talks with nearby institutions including the Smithsonian and the National Gallery of Art. “Then we developed a game plan on that second day out, and started putting things in place on Days 3, 4 and 5.”Similar conversations are happening at museums across the globe, as those tasked with securing art ask: “Could that happen here?” One California museum knows the answer is yespolice are investigating the theft of more than 1,000 items just before the Louvre heist.At the same time, many were acknowledging the inherent, even painful tension in their task: Museums are meant to help people engage with artnot to distance them from it.“The biggest thing in museums is the visitor experience,” Beaver said. “We want visitors to come back. We don’t want them to feel as though they’re in a fortress or a restrictive environment.”It’s an issue many are grappling withmost of all, of course, the Louvre, whose director, Laurence des Cars, has acknowledged “a terrible failure” of security measures.It was crystallized in a letter of support for the Louvre and its beleaguered leader, from 57 museums across the globe. “Museums are places of transmission and wonder,” said the letter, which appeared in Le Monde. “Museums are not strongholds nor are they secret vaults.” It said the very essence of museums “lies in their openness and accessibility.” Aging security systems A number of museums declined to comment on the Louvre heist when contacted by The Associated Press, to avoid not only discussing security but also criticizing the Louvre at a sensitive time.French police have acknowledged major security gaps: Paris Police Chief Patrice Faure told Senate lawmakers Wednesday that aging systems had left the museum weakened.François Chatillon, France’s chief architect of historical monuments, noted nonetheless that many museums, especially in Europe, are in historic buildings that were not constructed with the goal of securing art. The Louvre, after all, was a royal palacea medieval one at that.“Faced with the intrusion of criminals, we must find solutions, but not in a hasty manner,” Chatillon told Le Monde. “We’re not going to put armored doors and windows everywhere because there was this burglary.”The architect added that demands on museums come from many places. “Security, conservation, adaptation to climate changethey are all legitimate.” Prioritizing protection Even within security, there are competing priorities, noted attorney Nicholas O’Donnell, an expert in global art law and editor of the Art Law Report, a blog on legal issues in the museum and arts communities.“You’re always fighting the last war in security,” said O’Donnell. For example, he noted museums have lately been focusing security measures on “the very frequent and regrettable trend of people attacking the art itself to draw attention to themselves.”O’Donnell also noted that the initial response of Louvre security guards was to protect visitors from possible violence. “That’s an appropriate first priority, because you don’t know who these people are.”But perhaps the greatest battle, O’Donnell said, is to find a balance between security and enjoyment.“You want people interacting with the art,” he said. “Look at the ‘Mona Lisa’ right around the corner (from the jewels). It’s not a terribly satisfying experience anymore. You can’t get very close to it, the glass . . . reflects back at you, and you can barely see it.”O’Donnell says he’s certain that museums everywhere are reevaluating security, fearing copycat crimes. Indeed, the Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation, which oversees Berlin’s state museums and was hit hard by a brazen robbery in 2017, said it was using the Louvre heist “as an opportunity to review the security architecture of our institutions.” It called for international cooperation, and investments in technology and personnel. Creating a balance Beaver, in Washington, predicts the Paris heist will spur museums to implement new measures. One area that he’s focused on, and has discussed with other museums, is managing the access of construction teams, which he says has often been loose. The Louvre thieves dressed as workers, in bright yellow vests.It’s all about creating a “necessary balance” between security and accessibility, Beaver says. “Our goal isn’t to eliminate risk, it’s to really manage it intelligently.”Soon after he took the security post in 2014, Beaver said that he refashioned the museum’s security and notably added a weapons detection system. He also limited what visitors could carry in, banning bottles of liquid.He said, though, that the reaction from visitors had been mixedsome wanting more security, and others feeling it was too restrictive.Robert Carotenuto, who worked in security for about 15 years at New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art running the command center, says museums have become increasingly diligent at screening visitors, as they try to thwart protesters. But that approach alone doesn’t resolve risks on the perimeterthe Paris thieves were able to park their truck right outside the museum.“If you’re just going to focus on one risk, like protesters . . . your security system is going to have a lapse somewhere,” he said. “You can stop the protesters . . . but then you’re not going to pay attention to people who are phony workers breaking into the side of your building.” The magic of museums Patrick Bringley also worked at the Met, as a security guard from 2008 to 2019 an experience that led to a book and an off-Broadway show, “All the Beauty in the World.”“Museums are wonderful because they are accessible,” he said. “They’re these places that will put things that are thousands of years old and incomprehensibly beautiful in front of visitorssometimes even without a pane of glass. That’s really special.”The tragedy of the Louvre heist, Bringley said, is that such events make it harder for museums to display all their beauty in a welcoming way.“Art should be inviting,” Bringley said. “But when people break that public trust, the Louvre is going to have to step up their procedures, and it will just become a little less magical in the museum.” R.J. Rico and Jocelyn Noveck, Associated Press
Category:
E-Commerce
The behavioral health sector is at a crossroads. The landscape is shifting rapidly, and for many, it feels harder than ever to plan. The One Big Beautiful Bill is a sweeping piece of legislation that redefines Medicaid eligibility and coincides with a broader restructuring of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) under the Trump administration. Combined, these changes have introduced new questions about sustainability, staffing, and service delivery. While some details are still in flux, the direction is crystal clear: Providers will need to adapt. To help make sense of whats changing, I recently joined a discussion with Chuck Ingoglia, CEO of the National Council for Mental Wellbeing, and Monica Oss, CEO of OPEN MINDS. We looked at where the policy is headed and how agencies can prepare. Here are three key takeaways for leaders preparing for the road ahead. 1. Medicaid work requirements will create operational challenges Some states have previously tested work requirementsmost notably in 2018-2019, Arkansas implemented work requirements, which led to widespread disenrollments. However, recent changes mark the first time such mandates are being implemented program-wide in Medicaid expansion states for able-bodied adults without dependents. Individuals with serious mental illness or substance use disorders are expected to be exempt, but the definitions and enforcement mechanisms are still being developed. That ambiguity is already affecting planning. Behavioral health agencies are asking: How will we know which clients are exempt? What documentation will be required? Whos responsible for tracking compliance, and what happens if a claim is denied? From a technology standpoint, these changes raise important infrastructure questions. Intake processes may need to capture new data points. Eligibility logic may need to be updated more frequently. Payer rules could vary by state or change mid-year. To paraphrase Monica Oss: Weve seen versions of this before. And what history tells us is that these requirements often reduce coverage without improving outcomes. So, nows the time to figure out how youll track compliance, support clients who might be affected, and safeguard your revenue cycle from gaps in eligibility. 2. Federal funding streams are changing but not vanishing The legislation coincides with administrative proposals to restructure the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration and consolidate federal public health agencies. There are changes HHS introduced in the proposed budget that still require Congressional approval. At the same time, the bill eliminates several behavioral health-specific grants that many safety net providers have long relied on to fund crisis response, peer support, housing navigation, and early intervention programs. As Chuck Ingoglia noted during our discussion, Behavioral health wasnt targeted in this legislation. But we werent protected either. We got caught in the middle. While new funding channels like the Rural Health Fund will become available, they will largely flow through the states, introducing more variation in program design, oversight, and eligibility. Behavioral health providers will need to align their operations and reporting practices with new criteria faster than ever before. To avoid being squeezed, agencies must be both grant-ready and advocacy-ready. That means tracking state-level implementation plans, understanding how policy changes affect your population, and demonstrating the value and outcomes of your services, often on short timelines. 3. Compliance and outcomes reporting are under the microscope In todays funding environment, outcomes reporting has become a compliance imperative. As grant criteria evolve and value-based payment models accelerate, behavioral health providers are being asked to deliver not just care, but proof of impact. Funding decisions, whether from public sources, private payers, or foundations, are increasingly tied to demonstrable outcomes. But outcomes can mean different things to different stakeholders. To stay competitive, behavioral health organizations need to clearly report clinical progress, service utilization, payer mix, and program effectivenessoften in real time. Health plans want data tied to value-based payment models. Grantmakers want evidence of community impact. State agencies want metrics aligned with the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set)and/or Medicaid Section 1115 waiver goals. The ability to pull this data quickly and reliably often depends on whether core systems, like your electronic health records, are structured to support it. That includes things such as: built-in outcomes tracking at the point of care, integration with financial and billing systems, and custom reporting dashboards that reflect funder-specific metrics. Organizations that rely on manual reporting or siloed systems will likely struggle to meet new requirements. In a tight funding environment, that can be the difference between receiving a grant or being ineligible. WHATS NEXT The days of treating technology as an optional line item are over. Leaders are recognizing that their ability to stay flexiblefinancially, clinically, and operationally often hinges on the strength of their systems. At a minimum, organizations need tools that can adapt to policy changes, support mobile and hybrid teams, and simplify administrative work for already stretched staff. That includes: Automating documentation to reduce clinician burnout, streamlining workflows as billing rules shift. Equipping leadership with real-time dashboards for decision-making., Improving client communication through reminders, forms, and follow-ups. When work requirements roll out, systems will need to flag at-risk clients, adjust claims logic, and document exemption statuses. When state rules change, workflows may need to flex without requiring a system overhaul. When staffing is tight, onboarding and training must be faster and more intuitive. What were seeing from agencies that are weathering this moment well is that theyve invested in infrastructure designed for change, not just compliance. Theres no question that the next few years will bring significant changes. But behavioral health remains a bipartisan priority, and there is still room to plan, adjust, and advocate. That means having the right systems, the right partnerships, and the right information to make decisions in real time. Josh Schoeller is the CEO of Qualifacts.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||